Well, to avoid memory leaking one has to not reloading the stylesheet, 
which is a good idea anyway.
But I agree with you.

PS. Found this discussion - 
http://www.tkachenko.com/blog/archives/000620.html. Sergey: "I'd not 
agree that script in XSLT is evil".

--
Oleg

Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
> "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.
>>>
>>
> 
>