[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Better include them in the XSLT 2.0 spec (Was: Re:

Subject: Re: Better include them in the XSLT 2.0 spec (Was: Re: Time for an exslt for 2.0?)
From: Colin Paul Adams <colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 13 May 2005 09:53:14 +0100
Re:  Better include them in the XSLT 2.0 spec (Was: Re:
>>>>> "Colin" == Colin Paul Adams <colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Colin> Or are you requesting banning non-pure functions
    Colin> altogether?  This would mean disallowing calls to extension
    Colin> functions, or else insisting extension functions must not
    Colin> have side-effects. The latter condition would be
    Colin> incompatible with XSLT 1.0, I think

Actually, it's far worse than that - functions such as last() are not
referentially transparent, so you can't have referential transparency.

Given that, would there be any advantage to having f($x) is f($x)
always returning true()?
-- 
Colin Adams
Preston Lancashire

Current Thread

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.