[Issue 2979] Xml tags with only attributes return as without attributes ElementParser.parse
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2979 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|2.030 |D2 --
[Issue 2979] Xml tags with only attributes return as without attributes ElementParser.parse
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2979 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||and...@metalanguage.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2009-08-28 09:17:31 PDT --- I have integrated hed010gy's first (small) fix but nothing else. We need to rewrite xml, so fixing it thoroughly first would be a bad investment. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2979] Xml tags with only attributes return as without attributes ElementParser.parse
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2979 --- Comment #4 from hed010gy y0uf00...@gmail.com 2009-05-15 06:50:39 PDT --- Now that I think about it a little, passing a copied tag back is very,very important. The user call back can hold references to all the Elements and Tag objects that can be assumed not to be further modified by the parser. Make them and drop them freely and let the GC do its business. A new tag needs to be created with every element anyway. I did try once the idea of making a parser that kept a dictionary of elements, so that there was only actual real copy of the element string name, and all element tags referenced it. Each time a new element was parsed, a look up was done on the table, and the reference returned , or a new entry made. Too much work. The concept of having multiple copies of the same element string in the XML DOM seems a waste, but I have learned to ignore it, and there is always more memory. Another memory / time / code tradeoff. The compressibility of XML by generic compression tools like 7zip is amazing. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2979] Xml tags with only attributes return as without attributes ElementParser.parse
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2979
Sobirari Muhomori ma...@pochta.ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ma...@pochta.ru
--- Comment #1 from Sobirari Muhomori ma...@pochta.ru 2009-05-14 06:36:02
PDT ---
why does the code use new Tag instead of tag_ ?
Alternately change the Tag constructor to report the Tag as START if it has
attributes. But this will be a bigger change code flow design and efficiency.
Either way, the onStartTag call returns a Tag with START
It's valid for EMPTY tag to have attributes and as I see Tag constructor parses
empty tag with attributes and sets type to EMPTY. What's wrong with this?
BTW found lack of support for ampersand-quoted attributes:
(line 974)
---
reqc(s,'=');
munch(s,whitespace);
string val;
if(optc(s,'')){ val = encode(munch(s,^\)); reqc(s,''); }
else { reqc(s,'\''); val = encode(munch(s,^')); reqc(s,'\''); }
munch(s,whitespace);
attr[key] = val;
---
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 2979] Xml tags with only attributes return as without attributes ElementParser.parse
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2979 --- Comment #2 from Sobirari Muhomori ma...@pochta.ru 2009-05-14 06:40:32 PDT --- WTF? Why it's encode instead of decode? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
