On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 08:39:47AM +0400, Nikita Churaev wrote: > > Further -- my own advice -- wrap everything in your own functions. > > This protects against changes or casting problem and makes the API > > work like you expect. > > Why a layer of abstraction? This issue is mainly about lack of > documentation and safe casting functions. I think it would be better to > improve the libxml2 itself. Here's my current attempt on this: > > https://github.com/lamefun/libxml2 [...] > If I'm doing something stupid, please tell me.
instead of flaming and then stating to write tons of patches on your git clone without comments on the git commits nor discussions on this list about what you intent to do the most likel outcome is lot of patches rotting somewhere in a corner of github. I'm not gonna magically pull your set of patches. I will review patches if they are sent on this list with explanation of what they are doing. And before rolling dozen of those get feedback on the first ones. Oh and use less incendiary mail subjects, after all my code and API as crazy as they are, I love them (to some extent, lot of this was set up 15+ years ago !) Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat veill...@redhat.com | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ xml@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml