> I would guess that this recursive solution would be quicker 
> (for documents larger than a certain size), but on the other 
> hand perhaps it could produce stack-overflow problems on 
> really large documents? As I understand it, using 
> tail-recursion is supposed to allow the XSLT interpreter to 
> optimise the recursion by converting to it a loop, without 
> pushing stack frames ... but I don't know how many processors 
> actually implement this? Does anyone know? Is my code below 
> appropriate for this kind of optimisation?

Saxon will optimize the tail-recursion in this example.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx
work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list