[jdom-interest] detach() [eg]

Kenworthy, Edward edward.kenworthy at exchange.co.uk
Wed Apr 25 06:44:59 PDT 2001

The only problem is that 1 and 2 don't make sense if used together.

Also 2 won't work because 2 child elements could be identical so how to
differentiate ?

Perhaps you should go back to coding and let the expert (bickerers) carry on
arguing ;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: philip.nelson at omniresources.com
[mailto:philip.nelson at omniresources.com]
Sent: 25 April 2001 13:57
To: jdom-interest at jdom.org
Subject: RE: [jdom-interest] detach() [eg]

> I can do better than both of these :-)
> Utilities.move(elementToBeMoved, newParentElement);
> A method like this can of course encapsulate either the one line 
> version or the 10 line version.
> We can overload both arguments quite heavily to take care of all the 
> different things we might want to move (Elements, Comments, 
> ProcessingInstructions, etc.). We could even add an optional third 
> argument to specify at what position in the new place we wanted the 
> moved thing put.

Is it just me, or this starting to look like some sort of transformation api

Of course this would work.  But to handle this one simple little case?  Your
idea of putting detach on Document is simpler.  And until a more general
purposes set of classes becomes a more important part of the api, what would
make me look there to get this done?

It seems to me we have a growing consensus here.

1 - detach becomes the responsibility of the parent and takes an argument of
the content to be detached.
2 - detaching a root element from document will put the document into an
illegal state and the IllegalStateException will be thrown by getRootElement
and getMixedContent
3 - after the root element is detached, it will internally be set to null.

So, can I go back to coding again?
To control your jdom-interest membership:

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list