Re: [libxml++] My proposed patches

[Jim Garrison <garrison case edu>]

On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 12:46, Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
> | The first patch adds cobj() to Document.
>
> Is it a real need to have it ? I'd prefer not to introduce it.

There is no need for it as long as the API is and always will be
all-encompassing.  In the same way, there is no need for Node::cobj() as
far as I know.  If Document::cobj() existed in 1.0, it would be easier
to work around the lack of the create_root_node_by_import function.

Really, I just consider it standard that the application programmer can
access the underlying C object if necessary, and I question why it is
allowed in Node but not Document.  At the same time, I cannot speculate
on how useful the Document::cobj() function will be in the future.

Jim