On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 09:15:00AM +0000, Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: > Mainly because having one class per node type is a more object- > oriented approach,
how does having more classes make something more object oriented? what a class or an object is should really be defined by your needs, and not by its object orientedness. > and it also leads to much improved type-checking > and optimizer possibilities. could you elaborate on that? when reading xml i am mostly interested in the data thats inside it and the node structure maybe. both should be easy to manipulate and rewrite to xml. i don't see what i'd gain from type checking here (unless you add a dtd that tells you what nodes are supposed to go where) most often i want to handle multiple nodes with the same code. having different classes for each most likely complicates that. not that i have tried, as i found the simple parser which just turns the xml tree into a nested array (which is exactly what xml is: a structured list of data) xml does not have types, and unless there is extra information (like from a dtd) the parser can't possibly know wether two nodes which look the same should actually be the same type or not. greetings, martin.
