Message198196
| Author | ncoghlan |
|---|---|
| Recipients | eli.bendersky, ncoghlan, scoder, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date | 2013-09-21.12:52:58 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <CADiSq7ffCjVLc-qznTa=E3oCGeEBLTfBusTP1hthTpv_PmWAaA@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to | <1379761007.32.0.578555927496.issue18990@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Actually, I think it's reasonable to define the custom target nominally abstracted by PullParser as always returning None from close(). As Eli notes, it's designed to let you discard events as you go, so remembering them internally to return from close() doesn't make sense. That means the patch could be simplified to just removing the root attribute without changing the result of calling close(). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-09-21 12:52:58 | ncoghlan | set | recipients: + ncoghlan, scoder, eli.bendersky, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2013-09-21 12:52:58 | ncoghlan | link | issue18990 messages |
| 2013-09-21 12:52:58 | ncoghlan | create | |