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

Re: RE: Is xsl:for-each "syntactic sugar"?

Subject: Re: RE: Is xsl:for-each "syntactic sugar"?
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 21:55:20 +0100
Re:  RE: Is xsl:for-each "syntactic sugar"?
On 07/05/2010 17:42, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
In the book, Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs by Abelson, Sussman, and Sussman, the authors assert that looping constructs (such as xsl:for-each) are syntactic sugar:

but they didn't add the parenthetical comment "(such as xsl:for-each)" that you have added.

Scheme mandates that systems implement tail recursion elimination, and define the behaviour of the specific looping constructs in terms of a tail recursive call, thus the different syntaxes are, by definition, in scheme, equivalent. So one syntax may be considered as syntactic sugar for the other.

XSLT doesn't mandate systems implement tail recursion elimination, and doesn't mandate any execution order on the items in a for-each, so the situation in xslt is not comparable to scheme.

David

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. © 2004-2011 All Rights Reserved.