XOM API for Processing XML with Java

[dvholten AT computer.org]

i dont know the actual implementation, but i would guess, that a call to 
hasChildren() can get
the requested result faster than a getChildCount, which has to determine 
the exact number of childs.
i propose to investigate on the usage-pattern of hasChildren() , and then 
decide.

dvholten






Janek Bogucki <janekdb AT yahoo.co.uk>
Gesendet von: xom-interest-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
09.02.04 15:12

 
        An:     xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
        Kopie: 
        Thema:  Re: [XOM-interest] hasChildren vs. getChildCount == 0

 --- Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo AT metalab.unc.edu> wrote:
> I sort of like hasChildren(), but when I marked it package protected 
> in the code, hardly anything broke except a few unit tests that were 
> testing hasChildren(). None of the samples broke, which is telling. 
> Therefore I'm leaning toward removing it. If anyone wants to argue in 
> favor of keeping hasChildren(), speak up now. In fact, if you have an 
> opinion either way, let me know. Whose in favor of hasChildren, and 
> who thinks it should go? The question on the table is whether we 
> should delete hasChildren. Vote now.
> 

+1 to remove hasChildren().

-Janek


 
 
 
___________________________________________________________
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80 
http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk
_______________________________________________
XOM-interest mailing list
XOM-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest