[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XSLT 3.0 streaming vs other big-data technologies
Simply moving to a 64-bit long would allow an InputStream that would take a million years or so to process, which is infinite enough for most people. This particular limit is easy to fix. There are others that are harder: 32-bit limits on the size of sequences and strings are scattered throughout Saxon not to mention the Java VM itself. One example: a streamable stylesheet can call position() to get the position of the current node, and position() is a 32-bit int. Similarly xsl:number uses 32-bit integers. Moving to 64 bits everywhere would be a significant challenge, not least because of the difficulty of testing all paths with the large data volumes needed to find the bugs. Michael Kay Saxonica > On 14 Jun 2018, at 06:19, Mukul Gandhi gandhi.mukul@xxxxxxxxx <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Michael Kay mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > The Saxon implementation does have some limits that mean the input stream can't be infinite: most obviously, the nodes are numbered using a 32-bit integer. > > Can't Saxon use java.math.BigInteger instead of the 32-bit integer data type? (if 32-bit integer constraint is not allowing Saxon to process theoretically infinite size input stream). > > > > > -- > Regards, > Mukul Gandhi > XSL-List info and archive <http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list> > EasyUnsubscribe <-list/293509> (by email <>)
|
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
|