"Oleg Tkachenko [MVP]" <some@b...> wrote in message 
news:eqdC9W%23NIHA.4480@T......
> Yes, but on the other hand extension objects are called via reflection 
> (they are not available at XSLT compile time hence late binding), while 
> extension script once compiler is called directly and so usually run 
> faster than extension objects.
> So it's a trade of.

Server-side, memory leaks gradually accumulate and eventually bring the 
server down. In this case there is very little of a trade-off.

Server-side XSLT that would be processed using XslCompiledTransform is 
better not to have any imbedded scripts.


Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev






>
> -- 
> Oleg Tkachenko [XML MVP, MCPD]
> http://www.tkachenko.com/blog | http://www.XmlLab.Net
>
> Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
>> The use of extension objects is recommended. Embedded scripts have to be 
>> compiled dynamically into executable code and this may result in not 
>> freeing their memory.
>>
>> For examples see the MSDN help.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dimitre Novatchev
>> "Sampat" <sampatdixit@g...> wrote in message 
>> news:0b88bc88-d00b-4415-9290-2f5c4447d357@a......
>>> Hi,
>>>  I have a requirement where in I need to call some custom .Net method
>>> from my XSLT. Just wanted to know which one performs better
>>> 1. Using extension objects
>>> 2. Using <msxsl:script> within xslt.
>>>
>>> Any inputs with some code samples would be helpful.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sampat.
>>
>>
>
>