- From: Stephen R. Savitzky <steve@rsv.ricoh.com>
- Date: 18 Nov 1998 09:51:22 -0800
- To: <www-dom@w3.org>
Miles Sabin <msabin@cromwellmedia.co.uk> writes: > Steve (was it you?) has suggested that we might *also* > (not instead) have more heavyweight iterators which > *are* robust in the face of document modifications. I'm > not sure this is a good idea, partly because defining > their behaviour looks to be very difficult, and partly > because support for them might have a negative impact on > implementations even if they're never actually used (cp. > NodeLists). That was me. I agree with you: I'd really prefer simple O(1) iterators with no implementation impact and easily-documented conditions under which their behavior is undefined. The *also* was to mollify the crowd that wants to have robustness at any price. In my opinion this should be left as an implementation decision. -- Stephen R. Savitzky Chief Software Scientist, Ricoh Silicon Valley, Inc., <steve@rsv.ricoh.com> California Research Center voice: 650.496.5710 fax: 650.854.8740 URL: http://rsv.ricoh.com/~steve/ home: <steve@starport.com> URL: http://www.starport.com/people/steve/
Received on Wednesday, 18 November 1998 12:48:59 UTC