Re: [Vtd-xml-users] Random Access Proposal (take 2)

[Jimmy Z. <cra...@co...>]

Cool!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rodrigo Cunha" <rn...@gm...>
To: "Jimmy Zhang" <cra...@co...>
Cc: "Mark Swanson" <ma...@Sc...>; 
<vtd...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Vtd-xml-users] Random Access Proposal (take 2)


> Jimmy,
>
> getNavigator would be used in some of my code to avoid passing yet another 
> parameter to methods, I just don't use it right now because my bookmark 
> class does not keep the navigator reference. If it did I would use it 
> right away.
>
> Also the method is so simple no one would be confused. Why hide this 
> rather obvious feature?
>
> This works just like the Pattern class in Java: you create it using a 
> string, and later if you really want to get the string back you also can, 
> since it's probably there in the class anyway.  Only that is useless, and 
> this feature is useful.
>
> getNavigator: returns the navigator to witch the bookmark is bound, 
> otherwise returns null.
>
> I can test the implementation, sure. Just give me a few days :-)
>
> Also, I'll include the rather trivial getNavigator in the test, ok?
>
> Jimmy Zhang wrote:
>> Yes, BookMark will go into the next release as an experimental
>> feature ... with more user feedback/discussion, we can officially
>> introduce it later
>>
>> regarding getNavigator().. if  non-critical, I prefer to keep it
>> out for now... if we keep it in, then later decide to drop it,
>> it will break people's code... so it is easier to add a method than
>> taking it out... plus one less method makes the documentation shorter
>> and a bit less confusing ...
>>
>> regarding equals() and hashCode(), the methods are there, we
>> can alway change the implementation...
>>
>> In the meantime, could you give the implementation a bit testing?
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rodrigo Cunha" <rn...@gm...>
>> To: "Jimmy Zhang" <cra...@co...>
>> Cc: "Mark Swanson" <ma...@Sc...>; 
>> <vtd...@li...>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:16 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Vtd-xml-users] Random Access Proposal (take 2)
>>
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> The getNavigator() method might spare some parameter passing, since if 
>>> I'm gona pass a bookmark around to another object I'll need to pass the 
>>> navigator also, somehow. It's not critical, but since it can be done 
>>> trivially, why not? Also, being able to ask the bookmark "hey you, to 
>>> witch navigator do you belong?" seems the phylosophically correct thing 
>>> to do.
>>>
>>> equals() and hashCode() are religious issues, just keep them your way 
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> A hashCode function should ideally spread the input amongst all the 
>>> hashcodes space, since collections using hashcodes might, or might not, 
>>> use all bits in the hashcode. But just don't bother with that.
>>>
>>> Jimmy Zhang wrote:
>>>> Rodrigo, I just checked in a quick update into CVS
>>>>
>>>> Regarding some of prior comments, my questions are
>>>>
>>>> 1. When would a user call getNavigator() any way? I kinda had
>>>> a tough time coming up the scenario...
>>>>
>>>> 2. Regarding equals(), I think that the current bookMark implementation
>>>> should be fine in that the only time two bookMark instances are equal
>>>> is when they contains node position of the same VTDNav instance, and
>>>> the node indices are equal...
>>>>
>>>> 3.  I am still not sure about hashCode, what is the purpose of the 
>>>> spread?
>>>> For the current implementation, there will never be colision for the 
>>>> bookmarks
>>>> corresponding to the same document (the node index is ideal)...
>>>>
>>>> Let me know your thoughts..
>>>> Regards,
>>>> jimmy
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>