| ★ wanayoo — archive 1999 http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/xml-dev-Jan-2000/0166.html | Nouvelle recherche | Portail wanayoo |
John Aldridge (john.aldridge@informatix.co.uk)
Wed, 05 Jan 2000 17:22:19 +0000
At 10:12 05/01/00 -0500, David Megginson <david@megginson.com> wrote: >John Aldridge <john.aldridge@informatix.co.uk> writes: > >In principle (the principle of least surprise), it's very bad >behaviour for two objects to be == in C++ or equals() in Java if any >of their publicly-accessible fields differ. Think of sets, for >example. OK, let me try again... --------- class QName { public: wstring nsURI () const; // http://www.w3c.org/1999/xhtml wstring localPart () const; // p bool operator== (const QName &rhs) const; }; class ElementInfo { QName name () const; wstring nsPrefix () const; // html wstring prefixedName () const; // html:p AttributeList &attributes () const; }; void startElement (const ElementInfo &info) throws SAXException; ---------- Advantages: (a) All values can be lazily evaluated if this speeds things up (i.e. the QName and ElementInfo classes need contain no more than a raw pointer into the parser's internal data structures). (b) ElementInfo can be extended later to add extra methods without source level incompatibility. (c) QName has no public fields which do not participate in equality testing, yet the equality operator has the "right" behaviour. -- Cheers, John xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Jan 05 2000 - 17:25:42 GMT