Subject: Re: [xsl] Increasing sequence ? From: "Leo Studer leo.studer@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:27:03 -0000 |
>>> Maybe the BaseX developers didn't implement proper short-cutting for >>> the "every" expression. >>> >> >> Or maybe they expand 2 to 100000 into an actual list of 99999 numbers prematurely. > > > I think BaseX is open source and we will find the answer in the code. > > Even before that, here is another guess: > > Maybe they are implementing the "every" expression using parallelism, > so they cannot stop the other three threads immediately when the > current thread finds that the condition is violated. > > Just one example where parallel execution is outperformed by > sequential execution. The exact data may make parallel execution on it > significantly slower than simple sequential execution. > > Speaking about BaseX: Congratulations for their just announced 8.1 > version. Among other things they implemented "efficient Finger Tree > algorithm for arrays" -- this is enormous -- really made my day. I have been playing around with BaseX today. Nicely done. Unfortunately the do not support schema validation yet ;-( I have also been playing with Saxon in Oxygen. I wanted to measure execution time for different code. However, I have no idea how to measure time in a declarative language. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance Leo
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Increasing sequence ?, Dimitre Novatchev dn | Thread | Re: [xsl] Increasing sequence ?, Michael Kay mike@xxx |
Re: [xsl] Increasing sequence ?, Dimitre Novatchev dn | Date | Re: [xsl] Increasing sequence ?, Michael Kay mike@xxx |
Month |