[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Complex recursion in XSLT 1.0
Manfred Staudinger wrote: > On 21/02/2008, Florent Georges wrote: > > I don't understand. By LILO I assume a queue and by LIFO > a stack. > No, both are meant to be stacks. Bizarre... I've checked a couple of algorithms books around there and all assume LIFO = stack and FIFO = queue (yes, I've also always seen FIFO instead of LILO, but that's not the point). Besides defining top, pop and push, there are also relations like: top($s) == top(pop(push($s))) those make the difference between both, I think. Do you have a ref with a "FIFO stack"? Interestingly, Sedgewick uses "stack" and "queue," as well as the more verbose "pushdown stack" and "FIFO queue," it seems in order to distinguish the "FIFO queue" from the "priority queue" and the "generalized queue" (the generalization of all those ADTs.) There is even a "LIFO queue" in the index (refering to stacks in the text.) Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail http://mail.yahoo.fr
|
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
|