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.