Subject: Re: Regular expression functions (Was: Re: [xsl] comments on December F&O draft) From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:05:00 GMT |
>I think a lot of this could be refined, but that as a general approach > it might be feasible. Any thoughts? yes this is sort of more like I had in mind You said > I suggest a function (or two, perhaps, > given the general avoidance of function overloading) that basically > tokenises a string based on a regular expression. The signature of the > function would be: and I said in a message that I posted a second before getting yours: I'd hoped (but haven't been able to cleanly spec so far) to stay with just adding regexp functionality even in this case, as that is (often) enough to tokenise the input string, and to control the extra state information required to parse the tokens using existing XSLT control constructs. I think we're talking about the same thing (you're more eloquent of course:-) David _____________________________________________________________________ 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 |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Regular expression functions (W, Jeni Tennison | Thread | Re: Regular expression functions (W, Jeni Tennison |
[xsl] Matching data types, Jeni Tennison | Date | [xsl] Re: Re: A question about the , Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |