• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@x...>
• Date: 06 Feb 2000 20:40:57 -0500

Stefan Haustein <stefan.haustein@t...> writes:

> Ok, replace "complicated" by "unconvential". I do not like 
> the idea off putting "hidden" meanings to string1 == string2. 
> Normaly, someone unfamiliar with the concrete implemention 
> would expect that both strings are java-interned. 

Agreed -- while the idea (as far as I understand it) is interesting,
I'm not comfortable with any serious obfuscation, no matter how
clever.  I've been coding for money long enough (13 years, believe it
or not) to have seen many examples of this kind of thing, and I cannot
remember a single one that did more good than harm in the long run.

Besides, XML parsing itself is confusing enough for non-specialists
(i.e. 99.99% of SAX's target market).


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@m...
           http://www.megginson.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SAX2: Interning names in namespaces
    • From: james anderson <james.anderson@m...>

• References:
  • Re: SAX2: Interning names in namespaces
    • From: terje@i... (Terje Norderhaug)
  • Re: SAX2: Interning names in namespaces
    • From: Stefan Haustein <stefan.haustein@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX2: relative ordering of startDocument() & startDTD() events?
• Next by Date: Re: SAX2: Interning names in namespaces
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX2: Interning names in namespaces
• Next by thread: Re: SAX2: Interning names in namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread