Subject: Re: [xsl] Is xsl:for-each "syntactic sugar"? From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 07:50:10 +0530 |
thinking again about Roger's original question: "for-each vs recursive functions" I think, other than efficeincy reasons for selecting between these two constructs, designer's select a construct because it's easier for them to design a specific algorithm (and to realize the design, people sometimes might go to extents like adding more memory or a faster CPU). Moreover, IMHO a code should be written, keeping in view that it will be seen, and possibly maintained by other people. A recursive implementation, for a recursive problem, is easily understood by others! IMHO, another point.. I generally wouldn't like to write a iterative implementation (for efficiency benefits), if the computing resources I have, could easily serve a recursive implementation for a recursive problem. To summarize the above thoughts, efficiency concerns (space & time) and algorithm design, are 'traded of' for different use-cases. On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:32 AM, Costello, Roger L. <costello@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > 1. Everything that can be done using xsl:for-each can be done using a recursive function. (True or False) > > 2. There are things that can be done using a recursive function that cannot be done using xsl:for-each. (True or False) > > 3. xsl:for-each is syntactic sugar. (True or False) > > 4. Favor recursive functions over xsl:for-each. (True or False) > > /Roger -- Regards, Mukul Gandhi
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] RE: Is xsl:for-each "synt, Dimitre Novatchev | Thread | RE: Re: [xsl] Need help with functi, cknell |
Re: [xsl] RE: Is xsl:for-each "synt, Kendall Shaw | Date | Re: [xsl] RE: Is xsl:for-each "synt, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |