[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: XSL Theory
Subject: Re: XSL Theory
From: Steve Schafer <pandeng@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 14:07:07 -0600
|
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 14:22:53 -0500, you wrote:
>The restrictions on no side effects and the one way (input to output
>transform) nature of XSL should make this a much easier problem than the
>general problem of proving the correctness of computer programs.
Sure, but "much easier" than "completely intractable" doesn't
necessarily mean "easy." :)
I can easily produce an example XSLT transformation that will be
correct as long as Goldbach's Conjecture is true, but will fail if it
is false. Obviously, it would be a contrived example, but the fact
that it exists demonstrates that you can't have any generalized
confidence in XSLT.
-Steve Schafer
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
- Re: XSL Theory, (continued)
- Jon Smirl - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 00:39:59 -0500
- disco - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:05:09 -0500 (EST)
- Steve Schafer - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:38:17 -0600
- Jon Smirl - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 14:22:53 -0500
- Steve Schafer - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 14:07:07 -0600 <=
- Jon Smirl - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 15:49:36 -0500
- Steve Schafer - Mon, 13 Mar 2000 09:30:19 -0600
- Rick Geimer - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:11:12 -0800
- David Carlisle - Fri, 10 Mar 2000 20:11:12 GMT
|