> Yes, in that case you can get the function called.  Once you
> venture into the land of extensions, anything becomes possible :-)


And you probably noticed from my other posts in this thread some
guaranteed ways to sequence the XSLT transformation process without
the need to use any extension functions at all  :o)




-- 
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play



On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Liam Quin <liam@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 08:04:45AM -0700, Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
> > Just use an extension function with an argument that it ignores (but
> > the XSLT processor has no way of knowing this) and call it every time
> > with different argument value, for example:
> >
> >     for $i in 1 to 1000000
> >          return (ext:myTime($i), f:doSomething())
>
> Yes, in that case you can get the function called.  Once you
> venture into the land of extensions, anything becomes possible :-)
>
> It was not the point I was trying to make, but maybe it is
> not important.
>
>
> Liam
>
> --
> Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
> http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ * http://www.fromoldbooks.org/