- From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 13:23:28 -0500
- To: DOM List <www-dom@w3.org>
Stephen R. Savitzky wrote: > But in > fact even with pseudo-timestamps on the document, you need an O(log N) test > to determine whether an iterator is inside the part of the document that > changed; presumably you wouldn't want to invalidate _all_ iterators, only > the ones currently inside the affected subtree. Actually I *was* thinking of invalidating all iterators, on the assumption that the number of iterators is typically small, even if we can't (due to garbage-collection considerations) determine its actual value. For Level 1 purposes, a NodeList doesn't actually get invalidated from the user's viewpoint; it just has to rescan the tree from the origin. > Determining the desired behavior when a subtree that contains an iterator is > _moved_ is even more difficult. One can make a good case either way. I think it's simplest to treat moves as remove + insert. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
Received on Friday, 6 November 1998 13:22:11 UTC