Hi Joe,
keshlam@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on 12/10/2007 01:08:09 PM:
> > Tying this back to my question, I take Joseph as saying that he
> doesn't believe the Xerces DOM should ever > be made thread-safe for read
>
> I'm saying I don't believe semaphores should be added to the
> standard to the standard Xerces DOM. Users can plug in an
> appropriate DOM implementation if they need threadsafety at the DOM
level.
>
> Apropos of which: I believe the non-incremental Xerces DOM *is*
> already essentially "thread-safe for read", though the demand-
> constructed version isn't. If that's all you need, Xerces may
> already have solved your problem...?
None of Xerces DOM implementations are thread-safe for read. I can think of
at least a couple of places in the non-incremental Xerces DOM which aren't
thread-safe, the getChildNodes() NodeLists being one of them.
> ______________________________________
> "... Three things see no end: A loop with exit code done wrong,
> A semaphore untested, And the change that comes along. ..."
> -- "Threes" Rev 1.1 - Duane Elms / Leslie Fish (http://www.ovff.
> org/pegasus/songs/threes-rev-11.html)
Thanks.
Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@xxxxxxxxxx
E-mail: mrglavas@xxxxxxxxxx
|
