On 10/6/14 10:24 PM, Ali Akbar wrote: > While reviewing the patch myself, i spotted some formatting problems in > the code. Fixed in this v5 patch. > > Also, this patch uses context patch format (in first versions, because > of the small modification, context patch format obfucates the changes. > After reimplementation this isn't the case anymore)
I think the problem this patch is addressing is real, and your approach is sound, but I'd ask you to go back to the xmlCopyNode() version, and try to add a test case for why the second argument = 1 is necessary. I don't see any other problems.