Re: [xsl] How to output open/close tags independently?

[Mitch Amiano <mitch.amiano@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Interesting. My poor system has but 128 meg of ram. I did run it several times 
to check, but I wouldn't claim anything is configured optimally.

Dimitre Novatchev wrote:

> "Mitch Amiano"  wrote in message
>
> > Not surprisingly, the second transform took about 5 times longer to
>
> run (83.34 seconds on w2k/saxon6.5.1/750mhz) than the first one (17.46
> seconds) (and Windows complained about my virtual memory usage). Not to
> mention that the first transform is a smaller amount of code.
>
> > - Mitch 
>
>
>
> Hi Mitch,
>
> My results are *very different*. With your set of 1000 elements
>
> On Saxon 6.5.2 I have:
> ---------------------
> non-resursive:   0.251 sec
> recursive:       0.280 sec
>
> It was more than a year ago when Mike Kay explained that Saxon
> optimises tail recursion implementing it with iteration. This explains
> the result.
>
> On MSXML4 (, which does not optimise tail-recursion) the results are:
> ----------
> non-recursive:   0.005 sec.
> recursive:       0.046 sec.
>
> so the recursive variant ran 9 times slower.
>
> However, there's a DVC variant (Divide and Conquer, see for example
> http://www.topxml.com/code/default.asp?p=3&id=v20020107050418&ms=60&l=xsl&sw=lang),
> which allows recursion to run much faster. With it the results were:
>
>
> Saxon 6.5.2:
> -----------
> non-resursive:   0.251 sec
> recursive:       0.280 sec
> DVC:             0.280 sec
>
>
> MSXML4:
> -------
> non-recursive:   0.005 sec.
> recursive:       0.046 sec.
> DVC:             0.014 sec.
>
>
> My computer is a 1.7 GHz W2K Pentium with 256MB of memory. This is the
> reason for the faster times.
>
> However, the difference in speed cannot explain the very different
> ratio of recursive / non-recursive reported by you for Saxon.
>
> Here's the code I used (copied your code and added the DVC one):
> ----------------------



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