Subject: Re: [exsl] Naming exsl:return/exsl:result (Was: Re: [xsl] Functional programming in XSLT) From: Colin Muller <colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 09:33:21 +0800 |
Jeni Tennison wrote: > So I don't think that exsl:return should terminate the function. > > And personally I think that means that it shouldn't be called > exsl:return or have any connotations that the function is terminated > (which unhappily I think that exsl:return-value does too). I think > that it will cause confusion amongst the majority who will not read > the definition closely. > > I think we need an imperative term that doesn't imply that the > function terminates. exsl:result-in, exsl:fix-result, > exsl:set-result... others? exsl:report-value? Or (non-imperative) exsl:value-of? Colin XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[exsl] Naming exsl:return/exsl:resu, Jeni Tennison | Thread | Re: [exsl] Naming exsl:return/exsl:, Uche Ogbuji |
Re: [xsl] browsers with XSL capabil, Robert Koberg | Date | Re: [xsl] browsers with XSL capabil, Larry Garfield |
Month |