Subject: Re: [xsl] Vendor extensions for XSLT - higher order functions From: "Dimitre Novatchev" <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 06:52:36 -0700 |
FXSL, unfortunately, is so powerful that I think many "ordinary" users find it rather daunting. A gentler introduction, using examples from the world of commercial IT systems rather than computer science, would help to sell it to the general public.
Concepts like: fold, map, compose, repeat/iterate -- form the alphabet of programming.
Certainly, if someone has arrived at grade 5 in school and still doesn't know the alphabet, this person will find reading even ordinary text rather "daunting".
To summarize, FXSL provides a big potential to learn, requires learning, and this is even a bigger value than simply the provided functionality.
-- Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev --------------------------------------- Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence. --------------------------------------- To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk ------------------------------------- You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what you're doing is work or play
> I am curious to know why some XSLT vendors have implemented > one or more XSLT extension functions with their product to > make for the implementation of higher-order functions (HOF) in XSLT.
In the case of Saxon, it was needed by an XQuery user, and availability in XSLT was just a spin-off. It's not possible to use the FXSL approach in XQuery because it relies on xsl:apply-templates. In fact, this kind of capability is needed much more in XQuery because even without FXSL, there are many things you can do with xsl:apply-templates to handle dynamic content that have no simple solution in XQuery.
In fact, in business applications I far more often see the need for saxon:evaluate() (in both XSLT and XQuery) where expressions are constructed at run-time from strings. But saxon:evaluate() is easy to understand, and it often gets used to solve problems where compile-time higher-order functions would be a cleaner and more efficient solution.
FXSL, unfortunately, is so powerful that I think many "ordinary" users find it rather daunting. A gentler introduction, using examples from the world of commercial IT systems rather than computer science, would help to sell it to the general public.
Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Vendor extensions for XSL, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] Vendor extensions for XSL, cknell |
RE: [xsl] Efficiency: predicate vs , Michael Kay | Date | RE: Re: [xsl] Vendor extensions for, cknell |
Month |