Subject: RE: XPath's role (Was: Re: Re: . in for)
From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 22:03:07 -0000
|
>
> Taking the basic example:
>
> for $item in $sequence return some:function($item)
>
> is equivalent to:
>
> <xsl:function name="my:for">
> <xsl:param name="sequence" type="item*" />
> <xsl:result select="if (empty($sequence))
> then ()
> else (my:function($sequence[1]),
> my:for($sequence[position() > 1]))" />
> </xsl:function>
>
OK, I'll change the rules. If removing range variables means that to achieve
simple things, people have to write recursive functions, then I'd rather
keep range variables!
Two reasons: Usability and Optimization. You can argue with both, of course,
but I think the solutions using range variables are more manageable both for
implementors and for users, especially the sort of users who've written a
bit of SQL.
Mike Kay
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|
Michael Kay - Sat, 5 Jan 2002 13:23:50 -0500 (EST)
|
|