From: Tim Ruddick (truddick@eng.us.uu.net)
Date: Wed Apr 26 2000 - 09:38:27 EDT
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> Sorry I didn't focuse on the XPath state lately but rather on interfaces
> XML conformances for libxml2.
Understood. That seems to me like the right approach, too.
> I would appreciate if volunteers could look at those issues (and
> possibly send patches ;-). At least a good pinpointing of the problem
> would help me fix them quickly.
I'll see what I can do. Acquainting myself with the code may take a
little while, of course.
> In that case it seems that the [..] evaluation left the remaining objects
> on the evaluation stack instead of generating a node set. Something must be
> broken in the [..] evaluation code.
This is good to know, and it sounds like an excellent place to start.
This is my first foray into libxml, so I was unaware that there *was* an
evaluation stack in the xpath code, for example. :-)
Thanks for your reply
Tim.
---- Message from the list xml@xmlsoft.org Archived at : http://xmlsoft.org/messages/ to unsubscribe: echo "unsubscribe xml" | mail majordomo@xmlsoft.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 02 2000 - 12:30:11 EDT