Thanks for your explanation Finn. (Also thanks Peter and Andreas for taking the time to respond--I read through both your messages quite carefully as well, in order to better understand the property resolution issues involved.) I looked at the current code and the patch again, and I think I now have a better understanding of why it performs faster.
Anyway, +1 for this change, except I would like to have the FONode.start() methods renamed to .startOfNode(). IMO it is a little more descriptive to newcomers to the code (even if annoying for those very familiar with the code.) Also it complements the endOfNode() method (although I admittedly renamed that from end()), and it helps with global searches/S&R's, as start() may also be defined in other packages with completely different meanings. Thanks, Glen --- Finn Bock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
