Re: [xsl] a nicer total sibling count than this

["Stewart C. Russell" <scruss@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Kay wrote:
> Using position() and last() will often be more efficient than using
> count() and xsl:number, because they work on the current node list,
> which you are using anyway to output the nodes.

thanks for that. Efficiency is important here, as it's likely that such a template would be called in the order of tens to hundreds of thousands of times in a typical dictionary.

And here's me thinking that TIMTOWTDI only applied to Perl ... ;-)

cheers,
Stewart



XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list