RE: RE: Designs for XSLT functions
> An apply() function (which simply calls another function whose > name is decided at runtime) would be easier to use than a > general-purpose evaluate() routine though. Programmatically constructing a > syntactically valid XPath expression can be tricky. > > Apply() would likely also be easier to implement and more efficient > than evaluate(). Ease of use? Programmers using ODBC or JDBC are very used to constructing SQL statements at run-time, and rarely complain. Ease of implementation? It's easier to implement one construct than two, and if one is a subset of the functionality of the other, I'd rather implement the more general one. Efficiency? Show me the evidence! It's easy to use the same kind of tricks as one uses for format-number(), caching the format patterns that have been used in the past so they don't have to be parsed again. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format