TAKAHASHI Masayoshi wrote:
> In addition, creating objects need cost. Yes, this cost is
> not so expensive, and Ruby usually pays many many cost :-)
> But IMO, SAX should be sensitive about cost. If we can ignore
> cost, we can use, say, tree API like REXML. It maybe more
> Ruby-stic and easy to use.

I agree that you need to be cost-sensitive wrt SAX, but IIRC then SAX
uses callbacks, so it should be possible to reuse the parameter object,
to avoid creating new objects all the time. (This would require the user
to realize that he has to dup it if he stores a reference to it, which
might be slightly confusing)

Just my 0.02 NOK

-- 
<[ Kent Dahl ]>================<[ http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~kentda/ ]>
  )__(stud.techn.;  ind. econ & management: computer technology)__( 
 /"Opinions expressed are mine and not those of my Employer,      "\
( "the University, my girlfriend, stray cats, banana fruitflies,  " )
 \"nor the frontal lobe of my left cerebral hemisphere.           "/