[libxml-devel] Seg fault when trying to parse empty string

2007-12-03 Thread Christopher J. Bottaro
Hello, This code segment segfaults: p = XML::Parser.new p.string = '' p.parse I'm using revision 220. Btw, is that the preferred way to load XML from a string instead of a file? Thanks. ___ libxml-devel mailing list libxml-devel@rubyforge.org http://

Re: [libxml-devel] Seg fault when trying to parse empty string

2007-12-03 Thread Dan Janowski
svn #221 catches this problem now. There are a variety of ways to seed the parser, not sure there is a preferred way. Dan On Dec 3, 2007, at 11:54, Christopher J. Bottaro wrote: > Hello, > > This code segment segfaults: > > p = XML::Parser.new > p.string = '' > p.parse > > I'm using revision 2

Re: [libxml-devel] Status of Patch #7758?

2007-12-03 Thread Paul Dlug
Dan, Just wondering, any feedback on this? Thanks, Paul On Nov 27, 2007, at 11:41 PM, Paul Dlug wrote: > > On Nov 27, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Dan Janowski wrote: > >> I see the merit in this kind of approach but it cannot conflict with >> the libxml work flow. I.e.: >> >> instead of XML::Document.pa

Re: [libxml-devel] Seg fault when trying to parse empty string

2007-12-03 Thread Christopher J. Bottaro
Cool, thanks for that quick fix. Got another one though... d = XML::Document.new d.find('/blah') Thanks again. On Dec 3, 2007 12:17 PM, Dan Janowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > svn #221 catches this problem now. There are a variety of ways to > seed the parser, not sure there is a preferred wa

Re: [libxml-devel] Status of Patch #7758?

2007-12-03 Thread Dan Janowski
Paul, It looks fine at first glance, but I have not had time to apply the patch and examine the results. The library is a lot less fragile than when I got it, but I need to be careful when adding code that is not fixing a bug to be sure not to blow something else up. Thanks for the patch. H

Re: [libxml-devel] Status of Patch #7758?

2007-12-03 Thread Paul Dlug
On Dec 3, 2007, at 5:09 PM, Dan Janowski wrote: > Paul, > > It looks fine at first glance, but I have not had time to apply the > patch and examine the results. The library is a lot less fragile than > when I got it, but I need to be careful when adding code that is not > fixing a bug to be sure