Re: [xsl] Re: Efficient Recursive Algorithms in XSLT (Was: Re: Constructing X number of elements)

[Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dimitre,

Yes, I noticed you'd changed the name of the thread, but only after I'd hit 
'send'. My apologies for weighing heavily, if I did!

Since I'm not an expert in implementations, functional language design, or 
algorithms, I can't speak usefully to your suggestions about where to take 
the design of the language. From my perspective, there is a usability issue 
(keeping  the language easy to use), although I don't want to stress that, 
since I find XSLT's functional approach very powerful, and don't want to 
threaten its integrity with demands to support styles of programming which 
might be "easier" for some, but which are by their nature, somewhat 
inimical to XSLT as it stands. (I also think it's a *feature* of the 
language if it's fun to learn by virtue of taking a different approach from 
the usual.) Yet I dare say that what you are proposing is completely 
consistent with this point of view.

Also, FWIW, I find the general education I receive here about functional 
programming, recursive algorithms and their implementation requirements and 
scalability, extremely stimulating. Thanks for contributing to that.

Regards,
Wendell

At 02:07 PM 8/21/01, you wrote:
> > With respect,
> >
> > We've given Ilkka the simple recursive solution. And Dimitre has reminded
> > us that in the general case, there are also better approaches. But Ilkka's
> > problem may not need to be solved in the general case.
>
> Completely agree!
>
> This is why I changed the subject. And the purpose is to show that while 
> there are
> plenty of toy solutions for toy problems in the books and FAQ sites, I 
> haven't seen
> a single mentioning of the heavy-duty, real champions.
>
> Also, that the parallelism that is inherent in these better algorithmic 
> approaches
> could be achieved and exploited by adding support for it (e.g. a new 
> element) in a
> future version of XSLT.
>
> It is up to ***us*** to correct this. In an answer, FAQ site, paper, book, 
> ... etc.,
> show the toy solution, but also describe the most efficient, most general 
> and (not
> only because of these!) one of the most elegant solutions.


======================================================================
Wendell Piez                            mailto:wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mulberry Technologies, Inc.                http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street                    Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207                                          Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD  20850                                 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================


XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list