RE: [xsl] Why is RelationalExpr left associative?

Subject: RE: [xsl] Why is RelationalExpr left associative?
From: "Gavin Thomas Nicol" <gtn@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 18:43:02 -0400
> So the question is: why are these kinds of expressions allowed? Are 
> there any useful situations in which one can benefit?

I agree that the grammar is quirky. I think the intent here is to
allow typical recursive definitions of expressions, which typically
allow something like

  3 > 2 > 1 

to appear.

There are a number of things in XPath that are semantically
invalid, but grammatically correct. Almost all of these are
caused by some form of recursion, or inclusion of a construct
to allow it's use in different contexts through recursion.


are legal according to the grammar.

I've often thought of recasting the grammar... but it's 
probably too late now.

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread