Subject: Re: [xsl] for vs. for-each From: "Dimitre Novatchev dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 15:03:10 -0000 |
Finally a good progress has been made on one of the proposals for XPath 4: Retrieving a sequence of items from a given sequence based on a sequence of indexes (https://github.com/qt4cg/qtspecs/issues/50) With this proposal: https://github.com/qt4cg/qtspecs/issues/50#issuecomment-799228627 , Michael Kay defines a concrete operator syntax and explores and evolves the main idea to its logical boundaries. I find the result to match exactly what I had wished for. Thank you, Dr. Kay! On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 12:48 PM Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:55 AM Michael Kay mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx < > xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> For 4.0, however, I would like to see better ways of accessing items in >> a sequence by position, and there has been much discussion about how best >> to achiieve this. >> > > Yes, we already do have the index-of() function, but we need a reverse to > this: > > from-indexes($vSeq, $vIndexes) > > and this would produce a sequence with items each of which is the item of > $vSeq at position the value of the $index-value in $vIndexes, when > $index-value iterates over $vIndexes, ot more strictly: > > for $ind in $vIndexes > return $vSeq[$ind] > > Why reverse of index-of() ? > > Because, for any $x in $vSeq it is true that > > from-indexes($vSeq, index-of($vSeq, $x)) > > is a sequence containing all $x items from $vSeq. > > Or: > > $x eq distinct-values( from-indexes($vSeq, index-of($vSeq, $x)) ) > > Or if we had sets in XPath, then: > > set {$x} === set { from-indexes($vSeq, index-of($vSeq, $x)) } > > And this can also be written as: > > set {$x} === set { $vSeq => from-indexes( $vSeq => index-of($x)) } > > > There is even this proposal for an operator notation for the > from-indexes() function, but individual preferences at present seem to vary > too much in order to choose such an operator: > > https://github.com/qt4cg/qtspecs/issues/50 > > > Thanks, > Dimitre > > > > > > >> >> Michael Kay >> Saxonica >> >> > On 14 Mar 2021, at 18:04, Michael MC<ller-Hillebrand mmh@xxxxxxxxx < >> xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > Folks, >> > >> > Given a variable with a sequence of values >> > >> > <xsl:variable name="values" select="(1,2,3,4,5)" as="xs:double+"/> >> > >> > these are three methods to report its content >> > >> > <xsl:sequence select="for $i in 1 to count($values) return >> $values[$i]"/> >> > >> > <xsl:for-each select="1 to count($values)"> >> > <xsl:sequence select="$values[.]"/> >> > </xsl:for-each> >> > >> > <xsl:for-each select="1 to count($values)"> >> > <xsl:sequence select="$values[current()]"/> >> > </xsl:for-each> >> > >> > The first works as expected, the second does not, but the third >> astonishingly enough gives me the same result as the first. Check it out: >> > >> > https://xsltfiddle.liberty-development.net/ei5R4v8/2 >> > >> > I read/understand that there is a difference between a for expression >> and a path expression, but since we can use atomized values in >> xsl:for-each, I would like to see more similarity between for and for-each. >> > >> > Should this be on the wishlist for XSLT 4 or do I have to >> learn/understand some more concepts? >> > >> > Puzzled greeting, >> > >> > - Michael >> > >> > >> >> >> > -- 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 ------------------------------------- To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes may be the biggest mistake of all ------------------------------------ Quality means doing it right when no one is looking. ------------------------------------- You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what you're doing is work or play ------------------------------------- To achieve the impossible dream, try going to sleep. ------------------------------------- Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. ------------------------------------- Typing monkeys will write all Shakespeare's works in 200yrs.Will they write all patents, too? :) ------------------------------------- Sanity is madness put to good use. ------------------------------------- I finally figured out the only reason to be alive is to enjoy it.
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] for vs. for-each, Dimitre Novatchev dn | Thread | Re: [xsl] for vs. for-each, G. Ken Holman g.ken. |
Re: [xsl] for vs. for-each, Liam R. E. Quin liam | Date | [xsl] sorting, xslt 2.0, Dave Pawson dave.paw |
Month |