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

Re: Re: mapping (Was: Re: Re: . in for)

Subject: Re: Re: mapping (Was: Re: Re: . in for)
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:03:26 GMT
Re:  Re: mapping (Was: Re: Re: . in for)

  However, why make a special proposal for lambda expressions. The surprisingly
  energetic response indicates that what people want (and nobody stood against this)
  is support for higher-order functions in XPath 2.0. Having higher-order functions in
  place, anonymous functions (lambda expressions) will naturally come as an added
  benefit or just as a convenient shorthand. 

Dimitre please post that www-xpath-comments arguing for higher order
functions now rather than Xpath5 (I suspect most of the Xquery side
of the working group won't see arguments on this list, and they're the
ones you have to convince I suspect)


This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

Current Thread


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.
First Name
Last Name
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.