Re: Lesson Learned: Don’t write XSLT programs this wa

> Seems like a reasonable strategy, right?
>
> No, itbs not. Itbs a terrible strategy.
>
> Consider what happens once the project is over. Sometimes I can reuse
> program#1 on another project (usually the program needs a little or a lot
> of modification). program#2 is specific to the output produced by
> program#1, so itbs not reusable. program#3 is even more specific. Ditto
for
> the other programs. In other words, at best program#1 is reusable. The
> other programs are throwaways. What a waste.
>
> Not only are the programs throwaways, they are all tightly coupled to each
> other: program#2 is tightly coupled to program#1, program#3 is tightly
> coupled to program#2, etc.
>
>
This code reusability concern is more appropriate to lower level/less
powerful languages.  Once we get to high level languages like SQL and XSLT,
reusability doesn't provide much and, as you notice, costs a lot.
Reusability is, in a lot of ways, a band-aid for using a  crappy language.
For high level languages, the problem space should directly convert to code
without the need to build out new 'reusable' infrastructure pieces.
What I use as 'reusables' are things that pre-process/transform xslt source
prior to execution.
Those, I can use in lots of places.

The pipelining mechanism provides a whole lot of advantages.