Subject: Re: [xsl] linkedin discussion of "can you sell an XSLT?" From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 06:01:20 -0700 |
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Michael Kay<mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> JVM byte-code or .NET IL code both are not processor-specific. >> Fortunately, there is no need for XSLT byte-code :) > > I can't imagine anyone compiling XSLT to byte-code that doesn't need the > support of a processor-specific runtime library, so the compiled code will > inevitably be tied to a particular XSLT processor. > Yes, but it is still a huge difference from practical perspective to need just two DLLs (the compiled XSLT library and the run-time support library) as compared to an uncompiled XSLT library with more than 100 different stylesheet files, *and* the XSLT processor in its entirety. -- Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev --------------------------------------- Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence. --------------------------------------- To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk ------------------------------------- Never fight an inanimate object ------------------------------------- You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what you're doing is work or play
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] linkedin discussion of "c, Michael Kay | Thread | RE: [xsl] linkedin discussion of "c, Paul Kiel |
Re: [xsl] Re: Determining whether n, Mark Peters | Date | Re: [xsl] linkedin discussion of "c, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |