Re: Insertbefore - c++ success and then failure

On Nov 11, 11:37 am, Boris Zbarsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > There seems to be no difference between the successful and failed
> > except the way the element was found.   The successful insert is
> > inserting before an element just added to the DOM, the failed is
> > inserting before an already existing element.
>
> Just added to the dom _where_?  Already existing _where_?
>
> >    i =     domDoc->InsertBefore(ielement, ielement2,
> > getter_AddRefs(dnode2));
>
> The object you call InsertBefore on should be the parent of ielement2.
> Clearly that's not the case here.  I suspect that it's not true in any
> of your other calls either.
>
> Of course all this is documented in the DOM spec.
>
> -Boris

> Just added to the dom _where_?  Already existing _where_?
The base HTML had RACEOTHR already existing and the input was just
added in previous code not posted.  Anyway, what and how much to put
into code snippets is always a question.

However, I did retrieve the parent of dnode just using dnode-
>GetParentNode and used that, it worked.  The immediate parent of the
other input field which was successful would have to be htmlform.  In
that case I had appended child directly to htmlform.  I assume that's
why it worked b/c htmlform was the direct parent.  In dnode's case I
made the same assumption.

Thanks for your help, it got me to try a couple other things and
worked.

 Yes, I read the DOM docs on insert. Seriously JS examples that are
shown don't help with gecko.  Maybe there's a better way, but all my
success from gecko/c++ comes via head-banging and code-slinging.
Unfortunate but I exhaust any docs and examples pretty quick.  It's
pretty much trial and error and post a question or two.  Judging by
the emails I get privately on some of my Gecko questions it's a shared
reality.  I spend many hours banging and testing code but sometimes I
get to the wall so I post.  Maybe it was obvious but I'm not a DOM
node expert just yet.

I do really appreciate your help, thanks.