> - why do we need to pop the entire stack in the destructor of the loader
> (shouldn't it be always empty)?

It won't be empty if an exception is thrown.

> - can the huge number of catch clauses in the loader be reduced by only
> catching a base class without loss of semantics?


Actually, I was going to open another bug after this was merged (since the bug 
existed before my changes).  The old (and still current) code catches the 
exception and throws a new exception passing the existing what() message -- 
that's wrong since the what() message from the json::* exceptions is only in 
English (which is fine since json::* exceptions should never be seen by the 
user anyway).

There really need to be diagnostics entries in the XML file for all the error 

Also, why are all JSON parser errors squished into the single JNDY0021 error 
code?  Error codes are free.  Why not have one error code per parser error 
(just as I did with my JSON module)?

> - changelog entry is missing (for the new feature and the two fixed bugs)

What bugs?

> I added Ghislain as a reviewer. He needs to make changes to the JSONiq spec 
> and,
> hence, at least needs to agree on the name of the option.

I was going to add him as a reviewer myself when I was "done" (which I'm not 
quite).  I was trying to spare him the useless spam e-mail from launchpad until 
I was "done."  So much for me trying to be nice.
Your team Zorba Coders is subscribed to branch lp:zorba.

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
Post to     : zorba-coders@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zorba-coders
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to