jhunter at servlets.com
Wed Jan 30 14:18:53 PST 2002
allvard Tratteberg wrote:
> > elt.getAttribute("foo").setValue("bar") will not drop the existing
> attribute reference.
> > elt.setAttribute(new Attribute("foo", "bar")) of course will do a
> > elt.setAttribute("foo", "bar") is a convenience method for the above
> > syntax, which is why it does a replacement. One could argue it
> > shouldn't, and one can argue it should.
> I would've thought the latter was equivalent to
> Attribute attr = elt.getAttribute("foo");
> if (attr != null)
> elt.setAttribute(new Attribute("foo", "bar"));
> What is the motivation for the "always replace" logic? I don't get it. If
> the reasons are good, perhaps we need an ensureAttribute method?
Why should setAttribute(Attribute) be different than
setAttribute(String, String)? I personally would think
Element.setAttribute(String, String) would be a wrapper around
Maybe someone else has a reference to the original Attribute and
changing that object's state indirectly (by a call to its parent) is not
desirable if it can be avoided.
I don't think we need another method. You can always just write the
code you gave if you really care about this.
More information about the jdom-interest