Subject: "Performance" in XQuery (Was: Re: Xquery for 'hard data probs' was RE: XSLT vs Perl)
From: "Dimitre Novatchev" <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:34:24 +0100
|
> So we have one author on the subject of XQuery stating outright that
> XSLT is more capable and another respected author stating that XSLT is
> superior over XQuery in situations of manipulating in memory xml.
>
> Hmmm, perhaps it will ultimately be performance characteristics that
> become the main reason to use Xquery over XSLT.
>
> Many thx for anyone's comments on this.
A word of caution when speaking about performance. Just have a look at some
recent threads of
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Feb/
and you'll see that by "performance" some members of the WGs understand
obtaining incorrect, distorted results faster -- for example, getting
unordered items as a result of a query.
We should clearly say: "No, Thank you" to such offers of performance and in
fact ask that the "performance" of producing incorrect results be reduced to
zero.
See for example:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Feb/1006.html
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
FXSL developer,
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL
Resume: http://fxsl.sf.net/DNovatchev/Resume/Res.html
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
- Xquery for 'hard data probs' was RE: XSLT vs Perl, (continued)
- Jim Fuller - Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:52:48 -0500 (EST)
- Michael Kay - Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:13:19 -0500 (EST)
- Kurt Cagle - Sat, 21 Feb 2004 03:32:10 -0500 (EST)
- Jim Fuller - Sat, 21 Feb 2004 04:51:52 -0500 (EST)
- Dimitre Novatchev - Sat, 21 Feb 2004 05:22:48 -0500 (EST) <=
- Michael Kay - Sat, 21 Feb 2004 07:40:44 -0500 (EST)
- Jim Fuller - Sat, 21 Feb 2004 13:50:07 -0500 (EST)
- David Tolpin - Sat, 21 Feb 2004 14:20:31 -0500 (EST)
- Wendell Piez - Tue, 24 Feb 2004 14:14:36 -0500 (EST)
|
|