Re: Revisiting the persisting of attributes on thecombo_box widget

On Thursday 11 September 2003 12:52, Mark Anderson wrote:
> > because it is replaced (removed). We could cloneNode() it and store that
> > instead althought I don't know what kind of a "hit" we're going to take
> > in terms of memory usage. No way to tell until we try, I guess.
>
> no need to cloneNode().
> whether a Node instance is an orphan in the DOM has no relation to whether
> there are js objects with pointers to it.

My primary concern would be in content-loader content in which the source 
document is removed. I don't know that every browser will handle this 
situation well. cloneNode() seems safer.

> i believe that all we'd have to do is insert this line in
> NW_checkNodeIsConstructor:
>
>     locObj.srcNode = set_n;

or:

locObj.srcNode = set_n.cloneNode(false);

-- 
Alex Russell
[email protected]    BD10 7AFC 87F6 63F9 1691 83FA 9884 3A15 AFC9 61B7
[email protected]  F687 1964 1EF6 453E 9BD0 5148 A15D 1D43 AB92 9A46

_______________________________________________
The netWindows developers list: [email protected]
http://netwindows.org/mailman/listinfo/devel_netwindows.org