Subject: RE: Designs for XSLT functions (Was: Re: [xsl] RE: syntax sugar for call-template) From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:44:40 -0000 |
> > Yes, but the conditional construct cannot be an extension > function since > > a function call in XPath evaluates all its parameter > *before* entering > > the function. > > Not necessarily; XSLT and XPATH give implementors considerable > latitude wrt evaluation strategies. I suspect that most XSLT > processors already use lazy evaluation to some degree. Yes indeed. Saxon currently pre-evaluates all the arguments in the case of an extension function, but for built-in functions it passes the unevaluated expression and leaves the function implementation to decide when and how to evaluate the argument. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Joe English | Thread | Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Jeni Tennison |
[xsl] Numbering Grouped Child Eleme, Jake Stevenson | Date | Re: [xsl] Converting RSS to HTML, Eric van der Vlist |
Month |