• To: "'Tatu Saloranta'" <cowtowncoder@y...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Bad programmers use recursion, xslt (Offtopic...)
• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 10:06:36 +0100
• In-reply-to: <20060326174233.83500.qmail@w...>
• Thread-index: AcZQ/MJk4qWvPuAESxSDIyH7wMOoMwAgIzIw

> So would there perhaps be also room for other xml
> transformation approaches, besides dominant functional
> alternatives? (but above 'wrap your own SAX-based
> solution' level)

The best-known such attempt is probably STX[1], which is a language for
defining streaming transformations. Because you only get to visit each node
once, you clearly need the ability to remember what you found, and STX is
therefore stateful.

[1] http://stx.sourceforge.net/

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

• References:
  • Re: Bad programmers use recursion, xslt (Offtopic...)
    • From: Tatu Saloranta <cowtowncoder@y...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Bad programmers use recursion (Offtopic was Re: XML Performance in a Transacation)
• Next by Date: RE: Occurrence Question
• Previous by thread: Re: Bad programmers use recursion, xslt (Offtopic...)
• Next by thread: Re: Bad programmers use recursion, xslt (Offtopic...)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread