[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendant-or-self::node()
Subject: Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendant-or-self::node() From: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:43:32 +0100 |
2008/9/17 David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>: > > >> the distinction between //foo[1] and (//foo)[1]. That has got to be >> the biggest downside of the way "//" is defined. > > and anyway any blemish in the definition of // is minor compared to != > which would have been better not being defined, since 9 times out of 10 > when it is used it does the wrong thing. > true, perhaps != should be for atomic comparison and much lesser used "ne" for set comparison, rather than the other way around... In Java using != to compare Strings gets underlined as a warning and you get a reminder to the use the method equals() instead, so maybe the same could be done here -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Wendell Piez |
Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Wendell Piez |
Month |