Re: [xsl] Streaming with XSLT version 3.0

[David Rudel <fwqhgads@xxxxxxxxx>]

It is probably worth noting that I use XSLT for unconventional
purposes. I'm a data analyst who would rather use XSL rather than,
say, Python or R, for a variety of reasons. I hate the limited data
structures of R, my data is structured enough that I prefer to keep
things in XML, I like having the full strength of XPath3 (rather than
use PyTables or some xpath1 library in a more typical
rapid-prototyping language ), but my work tends to be too complex to
be handled by XQuery.

The byte-code generation time is negligible compared to the runtime of
most of my analysis scripts.
-David

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 11 Mar 2014, at 15:12, David Rudel <fwqhgads@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Radu,
>> Regarding your "In conclusion" paragraph, is this for the
>> transformation under discussion, or are you speaking more generally?
>> The reason I ask is that at one time oXygen's default behavior was to
>> disable byte-code generation. If that is still the case, wouldn't a
>> use also need to enable byte-code generation in order to get similar
>> performance?
>>
>> I use oXygen and typically load a completely empty configuration file
>> as a "custom" config. This typically makes my scripts run about twice
>> as quickly compared to default oXygen behavior owing to the generation
>> of byte-code.
>> -David
>
> Interesting. I would have assumed that for many oXygen scenarios, the extra compile-time cost of generating bytecode didn't justify the run-time benefits; but that's in the absence of any measurements.
>
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica
>



-- 

"A false conclusion, once arrived at and widely accepted is not
dislodged easily, and the less it is understood, the more tenaciously
it is held." - Cantor's Law of Preservation of Ignorance.