Re: [xml] redicting parts of trees

[Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik 4commerce de>]

Hi,

On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 16:59 +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Kasimier Buchcik wrote:

[...]

> > Yeah, I read some of the message on your lxml list about your mechanism
> > to keep detached nodes alive if they are referenced by multiple wrapper
> > proxies. We took a sometimes memory-consuming but simple approach: we
> > never free any removed Libxml2 nodes from the document, they are moved
> > into an internal list of "garbage" nodes in the document wrapper and
> > freed when the document is freed. A "flush" method can be used to
> > cleanup such "garbage" nodes, if the user is sure that it's safe.
>
> Right, since lxml aims at being as "Pythonic" as possible I don't want 
> the user to worry about these issues at all. I think I've accomplished 
> this fairly well, though I'm still mopping up bugs here and there once 
> every while (plus some fundamental stuff I hope to solve for good when 
> we have an adoptNode()) and I'm sure some performance issues could be 
> improved somewhat still.

OK. We wanted to be it as quick as possible. The "flushGarbage" is
normally not called, so only after massive removals of nodes. Do you
handle XPath results as well? I.e. is the reference counter (if that's
what you do) increased for every node in such a list as well?

[...]

> > Yes, in your case, if single attributes are not expected to be adopted,
> > and potentially many auto-created namespace declarations don't bother
> > you, the mechanism of xmlReconciliateNs seems best fitting: it just
> > re-creates the missing declarations on the adopted element. OK, good to
> > know that!
>
> Yes, indeed. I am a bit concerned the namespace declarations will be 
> polluted somewhat when serializing, but I can live with that for now, as 
> long as the infoset is still okay.

I'll try to store the ns-declarations on the doc, as I have Rob on this
side now. So we'll get less redundant ns-declarations.

Regards,

Kasimier