Re: Re: First public working draft of XSLT 2.1

Play the video

Subject: Re: Re: First public working draft of XSLT 2.1
From: ac <ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 03:43:32 -0400

Hi Vladimir,

I understand your concerns but feel that you may be forgetting many very useful use cases and, if I understand well what you mean by "the worst effect will be from developers who will widely practice the "easiest" way to achieve desired effect with dynamic xpath", I would think that any function, instruction, or feature can be misused and typically is, sometimes. That does not mean that we should remove them all, does it? If you built smart XML layouts, for example, with embedded rules, to query/fetch content, for example, would you define your own rule language and create your custom rule language interpreter, or would you not do that and rather hardwire all your queries in the applications, forcing users to modify the applications if they need to change/add/remove queries and/or layouts, or would you prefer using xpath and evaluate(), or do you have some other way of handling this?

Compilation and interpreters are not mutually exclusive and interpreters have proven their usefulness. Of course, if you compile to native code, without external run-time support, you probably need to handle run-time internally, and the less features to support, the less code you may have to write/compile/deploy, but again, removing everything may be even better.

I am sorry to disagree, but evaluate() seems very valuable. We have more compelling use cases for it and I am happy that it will finally be part of the standard.

OTOH, I agree that higher-order functions are indeed very useful too.

Regards,
ac

I think, that the new xsl:evaluate instruction is the most harmful addition, as it either rules out the idea of compilation of xslt in native/IL/other language code, or demands for interpreter or compiler to be available at stylesheet execution time.

This makes execution environment much more heavier than necessary.
But probably the worst effect will be from developers who will widely
practice the "easiest" way to achieve desired effect with dynamic xpath.
On the other hand indirect function calls introduced in xpath 2.1 give
enough power to model dynamic flexibility, if required.
--
Vladimir Nesterovsky
http://www.nesterovsky-bros.com/

Current Thread

Re: First public working draft of XSLT 2.1, (continued)
- ac - 12 May 2010 16:28:27 -0000
- Dimitre Novatchev - 12 May 2010 17:22:18 -0000
  - Michael Kay - 12 May 2010 18:06:40 -0000
- Vladimir Nesterovsky - 15 May 2010 05:06:40 -0000
  - ac - 15 May 2010 07:43:58 -0000 <=
    - Vladimir Nesterovsky - 15 May 2010 11:40:46 -0000
    - Dave Pawson - 15 May 2010 13:48:46 -0000
  - Michael Kay - 15 May 2010 19:51:55 -0000
    - Dimitre Novatchev - 15 May 2010 20:17:16 -0000

<- Previous	Index	Next ->
Re: First public working draf, Vladimir Nesterovsky	Thread	Re: First public working draf, Vladimir Nesterovsky
Re: First public working draf, Vladimir Nesterovsky	Date	Re: First public working draf, Vladimir Nesterovsky
	Month

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

RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3

XML Editor - Download a 15 Day Free Trial Now >

See What's New in Stylus Studio >

Buy Stylus Studio - XML Editor - Now >