Subject: [xsl] Re: RE: Simple problem - complicated solution From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 15:12:54 -0700 (PDT) |
"Stuart Celarier" <stuart at ferncrk dot com> wrote: > The solutions that Joerg presented work correctly, but they are both > O(n^2) solutions. That is computer-science-speak for the processing > time is proportional to the square of number of data elements. No big > deal for small values of n, but definitely a performance problem as > the data set gets big. The second one (with the following- > sibling::datum in the XPath predicates) takes about half the time of > the first one, but it is still proportional to n^2. > For large sets of data, it would be worth looking at an O(n log n) > solution, [the nice description of a min/max algorithm through sourting skipped] Hi Stuart, Probably it would be useful to know that there's an O(N) solution. For example, this algorithm is implemented by the minimuma() and maximum() functions of FXSL. Another implementation is a simple recursive named template -- there is an example of this in Dave Pawson's XSLT FAQ. Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] xhtml XPath problem, Dion Houston | Thread | [xsl] Simple problem - complicated , Stuart Celarier |
RE: [xsl] Simple problem - complica, Stuart Celarier | Date | Re: Re: Subject: Re: [xsl] Bug in t, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |