- From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:10:18 -0700
- To: "'www-dom@w3.org'" <www-dom@w3.org>
From the draft: >Issue XPath-30: >Eliminate the reusable result argument. >Resolution: No change. >No. We have use cases for it, and there is already an implementation showing there >is nothing wrong with it. At least, I would like to have the wording changed on the description of the result argument. It currently reads: The result specifies a specific XPathResult which may be reused and returned by this method. If this is specified as null or the implementation cannot reuse the specified result, a new XPathResult will be constructed and returned. The problematic part is "cannot reuse" since that implies that implementation must try to reuse the result set even if the implementor knows that reusing the argument is going to be more expensive than creating a fresh result object. The description should be worded so an implementation is completely free to disregard the result argument. I was hoping that another person who also commented on this method was going to benchmark any difference in performance between reusing a result set and passing null consistently. My instinct is that any performance gain is negligible.
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 13:09:42 UTC