Home. 
.

transparent

transparent

transparent

Altova Mailing List Archives


RE: [xsl] XSL: For-Each Efficient or Not?

From: "bryan" <bry@---------->
To:
Date: 7/1/2002 8:09:00 AM
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?


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


transparent
Print
Mail
Digg
delicious
Disclaimer
.

These Archives are provided for informational purposes only and have been generated directly from the Altova mailing list archive system and are comprised of the lists set forth on www.altova.com/list/index.html. Therefore, Altova does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, reliability, completeness, usefulness, non-infringement of intellectual property rights, or quality of any content on the Altova Mailing List Archive(s), regardless of who originates that content. You expressly understand and agree that you bear all risks associated with using or relying on that content. Altova will not be liable or responsible in any way for any content posted including, but not limited to, any errors or omissions in content, or for any losses or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of or reliance on any content. This disclaimer and limitation on liability is in addition to the disclaimers and limitations contained in the Website Terms of Use and elsewhere on the site.

.
.

transparent

transparent