Hi John, "Newman, John W" <[email protected]> wrote on 07/19/2011 02:15:20 PM:
> I?m not getting the reason why you cannot provide an extension that > syncs the internal writes just for the read only DOM methods. To > allow thread safe reads particular to the implementation I know I am > using. I do not expect arbitrary library swaps to work.. that is nonsense. > > Would it really be that hard: search for references to the internal > state, for each reference, is the reference from a ?read only? > method? No-> do nothing, we know writes will still be volatile; > Yes -> override the method in the new extension, putting a sync > block using the touched internal field as the mutex? > > performance should be fine, documents do not get corrupt from being > read twice, single threaded app guy doesn?t use it, everyone is happy. To quote myself from 2007: "... I think it's unlikely to happen for the same reasons for many things that don't happen in open source projects: limited resources which don't have enough interest (possibly in part because the community doesn't have enough interest) and/or time and/or capability to do the work." Setting aside opinions of whether this should be done or not, throughout the years no one has ever volunteered to attempt this work. As long as that stays the case that would be the greatest reason it wouldn't happen. Thanks. Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]
