Subject: Re: [xsl] <quote>XSL is NOT easy</quote>|
From: Robert Koberg <rob@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:44:44 -0400
On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 03:09 -0600, M. David Peterson wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:52:01 -0600, bryan rasmussen > <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hmm, not sure if I would classify Xquery as a functional language. > > Declarative, sure, I guess query languages tend to be, but not sure > > about the functional. Why do you say it is? > > I agree that one could argue that XQuery is not a purely functional > programming language, but none-the-less, for all intents and purposes I thought it was porpoises in tents ??? > its > a functional language, > > e.g. @ http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/414/chamberlin.pdf > > <quote> > XQuery is a functional > language comprised of several kinds of > expressions that can be nested and > composed with full generality. > </quote> > > If not mistaken, the XQuery spec *used* to start off with something > similar to the above, but it seems it got cut from the final spec. Maybe > for a reason?