[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: [xsl] The evaluate function
Subject: RE: [xsl] The evaluate function From: Mark Feblowitz <mfeblowitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:46:03 -0500 |
I knew I'd be tapping into some controversy... Just didn't know how fierce :) I'm still unclear how the addition of a dynamic eval, if implemented as a function, would violate the assumption that all (other) expressions are static. Would it be possible to treat these as special and treat the rest as optimizable? > Without answering your question, I'll address what I think you're implying :) No implication intended. I really do want to know which processors don't support the eval function. If I end up relying on the existence of such a capability (without the support of the standard) I'd at least like to know that it's generally available. (Yes, I know, bad practice in the standards world). > Introducing evaluate() now, IMHO, would be an example of premature optimization. Hmm? Are you saying that it's too early in the language's history to introduce such a feature (and remove the assumption of static expressions)? If so, wouldn't it be an example of premature de-optimization ;-) Mark XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] The evaluate function, Jeni Tennison | Thread | RE: [xsl] The evaluate function, Evan Lenz |
RE: [xsl] Re: Re: Assignment no, dy, Evan Lenz | Date | [xsl] Element - centric output, Maulik Modi |
Month |