Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Jonathan Robie wrote: > > As you point out, static typing can definitely improve runtime performance. > Consider comparisons. In XQuery, $a = $b can mean a lot of things. If you > know both are singleton integers, you can just do an integer compare. If $b > is a sequence, you have to do existential quantification. If both are > strings, you need a string compare. The static type system can rewrite the > query to do the appropriate compare without needing to examine the data. > Without it, you have to pick your way through the data and use conditional > logic to figure out which comparison to use. You have been asking for concrete examples where XQuery's type system imposes an additional cost on users. I think the above counts as such an example. If there is no efficient way to implement '=' without static type analysis, and static type analysis requires a W3C XML Schema as an input (which is my interpretation of [XQuery] section 3.1, please correct me if I'm wrong), then anybody who uses '=' has to pay, either by decreased efficiency or by having to use a W3C XML Schema. --Joe English jenglish@f...
|
