Subject: RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient or Not? From: Johannes Döbler <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 18:59:47 +0200 |
"child::*[position()=1 and name()='factorof']" will be transformed to "firstchild::*[name()='factorof']" which could easily be reduced to "firstchild::factorof'"
Wendell wrote: >m:apply[factorof[not(preceding-sibling::*)]]
>will be better than
>m:apply[child::*[position()=1 and name()='factorof']]
at first I didn't get your point on this one. I supposed on further consideration that it was right, although it seems like it would be mainly dependent on the order in which xpath is evaluated by the processor, I mean that a reasonably clever processor would evaluate [position()=1 and name()='factorof'] first and then from there look for any child::* which matched this, with the result that it would only check the first child to see if it had a name of factorof? Am I very wrong in this supposition?
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient o, bryan | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient o, Wendell Piez |
Re: [xsl] disable-output-escaping, Oleg Tkachenko | Date | [xsl] Practicality of Separating Da, intelikon |
Month |