Re: time to upgrade our bundled expat?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 02:35:13PM +0100, Emiliano wrote: > "Thies C. Arntzen" wrote: > > > > We use it a lot. Works well, supports multiple charsets, and is now in > > > as sane library format so internalizatin isn't strictly necesary > > > anymore (although there can be reasons to do so all the same, of > > > course). > > > > > > Is there anything specific you want to know about it? > > > > -was the upgrade from the original jclark-dist painfull at > > all? > > We haven't seen any API changes ourselves, and I think we use a fairly > sizeable part of the API. We had our own version of expat-lib, built > from jclark-dist, and include file name changes aside, it was painless. cool - i'll try to bump up the bundled expat then. > > > -are there any known incompatiblities? > > Not that I know of, altough ISTR that apache had renamed some function > names for their internalized version. Our resident expat 'expert' will > be online in a few hours and I'm sure he can give you more details. i think we have some namespace protection for "ours" as well. > > > -do you think that if we upgrade the PHP 4 bundled expat > > we'll hit any wall? > > In what sense? > > Just to satisfy my curiosity, why is expat being internalized when > it's available as a library? To minimize external dependancies? yep, more and more ppl are using xml so bundleing reduces the "noise" on the ML:-) we did the same with the mysql client-lib for the very same reason. tc