Re: topological sort

Subject: Re: topological sort
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 17:45:06 GMT
> When I started to think of
> "count(...)=0" as a kind of a NOT, things became a bit clearer.  See

It's clearer still if you write it as not() rather than using count()

 field[count(type/ref)>0 and ... )

could more clearly be written

field[type/ref and ... )


field[count(type/ref)=0 or ...

could be written

field[not(type/ref) or ...

If you use a node set in a boolean contextthen it is true if it is non
empty, so it can be used directly rather than counting it and then
testing the value against 0.


This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread