Re: [xsl] a nicer total sibling count than this

Subject: Re: [xsl] a nicer total sibling count than this
From: "Stewart C. Russell" <scruss@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:25:44 -0400
Michael Kay wrote:

Using position() and last() will often be more efficient than using count() and xsl:number, because they work on the current node list, which you are using anyway to output the nodes.

thanks for that. Efficiency is important here, as it's likely that such a template would be called in the order of tens to hundreds of thousands of times in a typical dictionary.


And here's me thinking that TIMTOWTDI only applied to Perl ... ;-)

cheers,
Stewart



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


Current Thread