On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 10:25:52AM -0500, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> At 9:36 AM +1000 3/23/02, David Peterson wrote:
>
>
> >Proposal 1: Preserved Case
> >--------------------------
+1
> >Proposal 2: Pascal Case
> >-----------------------
-1
> >Item 2: A Generic XPath implementation
> >======================================
> >Question: Should a Generic XPath be implemented?
> >
> >Vote:
>
+1
By the way, I think people may have forgotten my original
proposal,which reduces the dynamic ("generic") stuff to a single
method, getNavigatorForObject(Object). Making a separate subclass for
generic would totally defeat the original purpose, which was to
*avoid* the need to import (and, worse, understand) the
implementation-specific packages. Which, again, IMHO, are pretty
useless, since literally all they do is
public class DOMXPath {
public DOMXPath(String path) {
super(path, new DocumentNavigator());
}
}
(or at least, that's all they will do after a little spring cleaning).
> (and by the way I don't believe that part about "quite a bit less
> efficient" until somebody proves it with a profiler.
Yeah. instanceof is actually really quick, and the big performance
hit with XPath comes when you're walking the document, not in a couple
of constant-time instructions up-front.
--
Alex Chaffee mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
jGuru - Java News and FAQs http://www.jguru.com/alex/
Creator of Gamelan http://www.gamelan.com/
Founder of Purple Technology http://www.purpletech.com/
Curator of Stinky Art Collective http://www.stinky.com/
_______________________________________________
Jaxen-interest mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jaxen-interest
