Re: cout << DOMString

At 09:56 AM 10/06/2002 +0100, Gert van Spijker wrote: >Here is a code fragment, that works well on my system, from my MSVC code >that converts a nodes value to a MFC CString: > >char* pValue = XMLString::transcode( pNode->getNodeValue() ); >CString Value = pValue; >delete pValue; This code fragme

RE: Borland C++ Builder 5 Professional

At 12:48 PM 6/06/2002 +0200, you wrote: >Works a treat for me Does it leak lots of memory when parsing documents that refer to external DTDs? We see leaks with every version of Xerces we've tried, whenever there's an external DTD (regardless of whether we're validating or not, I think the DTD

Re: Proposal: C++ Language Binding for DOM Level 2 - in term of IDOM

Joseph Kesselman wrote: > >It was my understanding that since the DOM interfaces are specified > >as IDL, it was intended that implementations use the appropriate > >CORBA language binding for implementing the DOM API. > >The DOM Working Group used IDL informally, as an API abstraction language.

Re: Proposal: C++ Language Binding for DOM Level 2 - in term of IDOM

At 08:31 AM 15/02/2002 -0800, you wrote: >Hi, > >W3C DOM Recommendation has only defined JAVA and ECMAScript language >bindings. For all other languages, W3C has links to binding owners' web >sites in http://www.w3.org/DOM/Bindings. > >In order to populate Xerce

Re: Xerces and BCB

At 12:31 PM 14/02/2002 -0800, Tinny Ng wrote: >As a general proposal, how about we exclude any out-dated project files like >BCB4, Vacpp in the source package distribution but still leave them in CVS in >case some users need them? It is confusing to ship some project files >that are >out-of sync

Re: Xerces with BCC 5.5

At 03:44 PM 25/10/2001 -0400, Nicholas G. Lesniewski-Laas wrote: >Hi, I hope I don't come off as sounding stupid or ridiculously ignorant, >but I can't for the life of me figure out why I can not compile Xerces >client programs, or even Xerces itself, with the free Borland C++ 5.5 compiler. > >C

RE: Borland BCB and Xerces.

At 08:13 AM 5/09/2001 -0400, Don Mastrovito wrote: >Regarding the memory leaks ... > >I've seen exactly the problems you mentioned. Using the Borland project >updates I supplied the last couple of weeks, I built DLLs, not static >libraries. The leaks were the same. Each call to parse() lost a

RE: Borland BCB and Xerces.

At 12:20 PM 4/09/2001 -0400, Jesse Pelton wrote: >There's been considerable work on BCB support in the last couple of weeks. >Check out the mailing list archive at >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xerces-c-dev. > >As for the runtime issues, make sure

Re: Force use of a known DTD

At 12:45 PM 12/07/2001 +0200, Evert Haasdijk wrote: >I've got an application where I use XML documents that _must_ adhere to a >certain, known, DTD. >What I'd like to be able to do is force my DOMParser (or its Validator, or >whatever) to always use a DTDValidator with that DTD to validate documen

Re: parse() memory leak under Borland

At 09:55 AM 7/3/01 -0700, you wrote: >This may be related to Bug #812 in Bugzilla >(http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=812) which is now fixed in >the latest nightly build http://xml.apache.org/dist/xerces-c/nightly/. Unfortunately it's not. I made the change suggested in this repo

parse() memory leak under Borland

[apologies if this is a duplicate, my original submission seems to have gone missing] Hi All, I've encountered what appears to be a memory leak when DOMParser::parse() is invoked under some circumstances. This occurs when linking against a static version of Xerces-C 1.4 built using Borland C/C+