Subject: Re: [xsl] Why are there no XSLT processors implemented in XSLT? From: "Tony Graham" <tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 15:24:04 +0100 (IST) |
On Tue, May 1, 2012 1:04 pm, David Carlisle wrote: > On 01/05/2012 12:49, Costello, Roger L. wrote: >> I will take the following as an axiom: >> >> Programs written to process XML should be implemented in XSLT. ... > The entire argument appears spurious, so it seems fruitless to try to > argue specific points. > > Why would anyone even try to do this, even if it were possible, it would To "[s]ee examples of what XSLT should never have been made to do." [1], apparently. How quickly we forget: [2]. > be vast amounts of work and would just produce an xslt engine that is > slower than the one you started with. >From [3]: Naxos is very slow and memory-hungry. Stylesheets larger than toy-sized will probably fail to run even if you specify a large heap for the JVM with -Xmx. Regards, Tony Graham tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx Consultant http://www.mentea.net Mentea 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming [1] http://osdcpapers.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.84/prod.40 [2] http://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/200701/msg00553.html [3] http://futzle.com/users/debbiep/naxos/naxos.html
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Why are there no XSLT pro, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Why are there no XSLT pro, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] Why are there no XSLT pro, Andrew Welch | Date | Re: [xsl] Why are there no XSLT pro, David Carlisle |
Month |