Subject: Re: [xsl] [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Sets and Math From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 09:45:13 -0700 |
> > I like Jeni's approach of defining extra functions as extension > > functions, > > Up to a point, although if you put a real evaluate() function in the > extension namespace, many of the more hairy tricks could be avoided. Maybe there should be a dyn:foo set of functions involving dynamic programming. dyn:evaluate would be an obvious anchor; another idea could be a function (dyn:vars?) that returns all names of variables currently in scope in node set form. And so on through the usual set of metaprogramming tricks. Some would choose not to implement the dyn module because of performance worries: fair enough. Also, should there be a function that checks whether an entire module is available, rather than having to check function-by-function? Perhaps common:module-available(string) where string is "math", "sets", "functions", etc. -- Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +1 303 583 9900 x 101 Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com 4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Jeni Tennison |
[xsl] paramter passing problem, Dom | Date | RE: [xsl] How to modify xsl:param w, Michael Kay |
Month |