Re: Memory management changes



Hi everyone,

well... this looks to me like looking for undefined behavior :-) Internally 
libxml++ could be using something completely different from libxml2 and so the 
users should not do this kind of stuff

Regards,
Alessandro Pignotti

On Monday 08 November 2010 16:51:37 Christophe de Vienne wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I see no problem if using only the C++ methods to manipulate the tree,
> but what if a xmlNode is returned by the C api and ones want the C++
> instance associated with it ?
> 
> My 2 cents (since long !)
> 
> Christophe
> 
> Le 08/11/2010 16:44, Murray Cumming a écrit :
> > Alessandro has kindly created a patch to (hopefully) fix problems with
> > using libxml++ in muliple threads.
> > 
> > But it's a rather significant change, meaning that we no longer use
> > xmlRegisterNodeDefault() to provide a callback where we create the C++
> > instance. We would still use xmlNode::private to store the pointer to
> > the C++ instance.
> > 
> > This requires us to check and create a C++ instance in several places
> > instead of letting it happen automatically. Can anyone think of a
> > downside?
> > 
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=634123#c13
> 
> _______________________________________________
> libxmlplusplus-list mailing list
> libxmlplusplus-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/libxmlplusplus-list

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]