Re: [xsl] Complex recursion in XSLT 1.0

[Florent Georges <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Manfred Staudinger wrote:

> On 21/02/2008, Florent Georges wrote:

> >   I don't understand.  By LILO I assume a queue and by LIFO
> a stack.

> No, both are meant to be stacks.

  Bizarre...  I've checked a couple of algorithms books around there
and all assume LIFO = stack and FIFO = queue (yes, I've also always
seen FIFO instead of LILO, but that's not the point).

  Besides defining top, pop and push, there are also relations like:

    top($s) == top(pop(push($s)))

those make the difference between both, I think.  Do you have a ref
with a "FIFO stack"?

  Interestingly, Sedgewick uses "stack" and "queue," as well as the
more verbose "pushdown stack" and "FIFO queue," it seems in order to
distinguish the "FIFO queue" from the "priority queue" and the
"generalized queue" (the generalization of all those ADTs.)  There is
even a "LIFO queue" in the index (refering to stacks in the text.)

  Regards,

--drkm





















      _____________________________________________________________________________ 
Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail http://mail.yahoo.fr