Well, yeah, I am just learning the basics :-)
But I figured that deleting the XercesDOMParser and returning the DOMDocument
would be wrong, because the XercesDOMParser owns the DOMDocument, no?
-Patrick
P.S.
Did running my "broken" code on your machine trigger the catch(...) or the
catch(const SAXException& e)?
On May 18, 2010, at 7:08 AM, Ben Griffin wrote:
> I had a look at your 'broken' source.
> There was no main function, so I added one in as follows:
>
> int main() {
> XMLPlatformUtils::Initialize();
> XercesDOMParser* parser = ParseXML("input");
> return 0;
> }
>
> I commented out the QK:: push stuff, because it's not part of the library
> (that I know of).
>
> I added
> #include <xercesc/parsers/XercesDOMParser.hpp>
>
> I don't have / don't use util.hpp so I added
> namespace {
> typedef std::basic_string<XMLCh> XercesString;
> }
>
> Regardless, I have sent you the source code directly.
> It compiles and runs.
>
> I don't really know why you would want to return the parser having parsed a
> file. Normally one wants the document from the parse.
> Maybe you are just getting the basics up first...!
>
>
> On 18 May 2010, at 12:01, Patrick Rutkowski wrote:
>
>> If any of you Xerces-C devs are up for it, I would be willing to go as far
>> as doing a screen-sharing session to debug this, since it seems to be
>> impossible to reproduce. I have my version of xerces already built with -g
>> -O0 even.
>>
>> Of course, that might amount to you helping me find a silly big in my code
>> somewhere, free of charge, which might seem unfair. Then again, maybe it
>> really is an obscure bug in Xerces, which would make it worth it.
>>
>> I dunno, I just don't know what to do anymore :-/
>>
>> -Patrick
>>
>> On May 18, 2010, at 2:47 AM, Vitaly Prapirny wrote:
>>
>>> Patrick Rutkowski wrote:
>>>> I have verified with test prints and gdb that fatalError()
>>>> in ThrowErrorHandler is indeed triggered like it's supposed
>>>> to be, so we're good so far.
>>>
>>> So the parser->setErrorHandler() is not broken actually, your subject
>>> line misleads. I could assume your toolchain or project is
>>> somewhat broken. If you could prepare a minimal self-contained test case
>>> it would be very helpfull to someone who wished to look at it.
>>>
>>> Good luck!
>>> Vitaly
>>
>
