[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 6:15 PM -0600 9/18/02, Aaron Skonnard wrote:
>I don't see how what you do after each "pull" would be any different
>than what you have to do within each call from SAX. You still have to
>build a state machine with a pull-model API, but now your state machine
>can simply take the form of procedural refinement:
>
It's not really all that different. But most developers are much more
comfortable with the iterator design pattern than the observer design
pattern. It's easier for them to see where, when, and why, each event
gets fed into their code when they ask for the event rather than
responding to it.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
