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

Re: Computational complexity of accessing the Nth item

Subject: Re: Computational complexity of accessing the Nth item in a sequence and in a node-set
From: Dimtre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 07:30:23 +1100
java arraylist complexity
> If there is more than one reference to $sequence, or if the reference is in
> a loop, then the value of $sequence is calculated progressively: any
> reference to $sequence[$N] ensures that at least $N items of $sequence have
> been evaluated, and then returns the $N'th item by calling Java's
> ArrayList.get($N-1), which I believe executes in constant time.
> 

So, if I have understood correctly, having

   $sequence[last()]

(and somehow more than one reference to $sequence)
will guarantee that any further access to the items of $sequence will
be performed in constant time?

Cant this be pre-computed automatically by the XSLT processor?
Something like computing a function with @memo-function="yes", but
done by the XSLT processor?


Cheers,
Dimitre.





On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 12:33:20 -0000, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder what should be the most likely computational complexity of:
> >
> >      $sequence[$N]
> 
> Highly dependent on the circumstances.
> 
> Let's assume $N is known statically to be an integer.
> 
> Let's assume Saxon 8.2.
> 
> If there is only one reference to $sequence, and it isn't in a loop, then
> the expression from which $sequence is calculated is effectively inlined;
> this expression is then evaluated iteratively, and execution is terminated
> when the N'th item is reached.
> 
> If there is more than one reference to $sequence, or if the reference is in
> a loop, then the value of $sequence is calculated progressively: any
> reference to $sequence[$N] ensures that at least $N items of $sequence have
> been evaluated, and then returns the $N'th item by calling Java's
> ArrayList.get($N-1), which I believe executes in constant time.
> 
> > Another question is whether the functions on sequences are faster that
> > manipulating them "by hand".
> 
> I think the answer is likely to be: sometimes yes, sometimes no. Sometimes
> Saxon may be able to exploit knowledge that's not available to the user,
> sometimes the user may be able to exploit knowledge that's not available to
> Saxon.
> 
> >
> > One translation in more practical terms: would it be realistic to try
> > to perform binary search in a sorted sequence?
> 
> Yes, I think that's a reasonable thing to attempt.
> 
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/

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.