Menu
▾
▴
#1185 TinyXML development has stopped and development has moved to TinyXML-2.
As per https://sourceforge.net/projects/tinyxml page:
TinyXML development has stopped and all development has moved to TinyXML-2. TinyXML-2 is available at https://github.com/leethomason/tinyxml2
As such C::B should at some stage migrate from using the TinyXML library code to the TinyXML-2 library code.
Some pages that are useful:
https://phabricator.mitk.org/T27985
https://www.codingpanel.com/a-complete-guide-to-tinyxml-using-cpp/
https://shilohjames.wordpress.com/2014/04/27/tinyxml2-tutorial/
Are there any advantages to TinyXML1? I mean i think ThinyXML is feature complete and bug free, no future development needed? What do we gain for switching, beside a ton of work and probably the introduction of bugs? (This is a hones question, it should not be sarcastic)
I agree it is allot of work. tinyXML 2 is supported is the biggest advantage and is 10 years old, soit should be less buggy than tinyxml as it was less than 10 years old when dev was stopped.
The resulting code:
a) simpler to read
b) easier to understand
c) no typecasting if done correctly.
if done wrong it will introduce bugs and problems. The two can co-exist in C::B and do not interact due to different namespaces (unless someone codes things up wrong).
Check out the GDB/MI code for and example of using the tinyxml2 with C::B as I am using it for the breakpoint and watch persistency.