- From: Watson, Christopher <CWatson@lightspan.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:03:36 -0800
- To: "'Joseph Kesselman'" <keshlam@us.ibm.com>, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: www-dom@w3.org
The same fixup goes for Range, which also has detachability. Christopher Watson Sr. Software Engingeer Director/Shockwave Development Lightspan, Inc. Tel: 858.824.8457 Fax: 858.824.8008 -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Kesselman [mailto:keshlam@us.ibm.com] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 12:56 PM To: Elliotte Rusty Harold Cc: www-dom@w3.org Subject: Re: TreeWalker detach() >Is there any particular reason NodeIterator has a detach() method and >TreeWalker doesn't? Because NodeIterator repairs itself as the document changes under it ("list position semantics"), its implementations may involve event listeners or the like which impose a performance burden on the DOM as long as the NodeIterator is active. Having a way to deactivate it is therefore important. Being able to do so immediately, rather than waiting until the garbage collector (in GC langauges) gets around to cleaning it up, may make a significant difference in application performance. TreeWalker's "current node semantics" do not require fixup in response to document mutation, so the same situation doesn't arise. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Friday, 18 January 2002 16:04:15 UTC