[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient or Not?
Subject: RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient or Not? From: "bryan" <bry@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:06:28 +0200 |
Wendell wrote: >m:apply[factorof[not(preceding-sibling::*)]] >will be better than >m:apply[child::*[position()=1 and name()='factorof']] at first I didn't get your point on this one. I supposed on further consideration that it was right, although it seems like it would be mainly dependent on the order in which xpath is evaluated by the processor, I mean that a reasonably clever processor would evaluate [position()=1 and name()='factorof'] first and then from there look for any child::* which matched this, with the result that it would only check the first child to see if it had a name of factorof? Am I very wrong in this supposition? XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient o, Wendell Piez | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient o, Johannes Döbler |
RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient o, Schrooten, Ben | Date | Re: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient o, Kevin Jones |
Month |
Keywords