Home. 
.

transparent

transparent

transparent

Altova Mailing List Archives


Re: [xsl] Computational complexity of accessing the Nth item in a sequence and in a node-set

From: Dimtre Novatchev <dnovatchev@--------->
To:
Date: 1/3/2005 8:31:00 PM
> If there is more than one reference to $sequence, or if the reference is in
> a loop, then the value of $sequence is calculated progressively: any
> reference to $sequence[$N] ensures that at least $N items of $sequence have
> been evaluated, and then returns the $N'th item by calling Java's
> ArrayList.get($N-1), which I believe executes in constant time.
> 

So, if I have understood correctly, having

   $sequence[last()]

(and somehow more than one reference to $sequence)
will guarantee that any further access to the items of $sequence will
be performed in constant time?

Cant this be pre-computed automatically by the XSLT processor?
Something like computing a function with @memo-function="yes", but
done by the XSLT processor?


Cheers,
Dimitre.





On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 12:33:20 -0000, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder what should be the most likely computational complexity of:
> >
> >      $sequence[$N]
> 
> Highly dependent on the circumstances.
> 
> Let's assume $N is known statically to be an integer.
> 
> Let's assume Saxon 8.2.
> 
> If there is only one reference to $sequence, and it isn't in a loop, then
> the expression from which $sequence is calculated is effectively inlined;
> this expression is then evaluated iteratively, and execution is terminated
> when the N'th item is reached.
> 
> If there is more than one reference to $sequence, or if the reference is in
> a loop, then the value of $sequence is calculated progressively: any
> reference to $sequence[$N] ensures that at least $N items of $sequence have
> been evaluated, and then returns the $N'th item by calling Java's
> ArrayList.get($N-1), which I believe executes in constant time.
> 
> > Another question is whether the functions on sequences are faster that
> > manipulating them "by hand".
> 
> I think the answer is likely to be: sometimes yes, sometimes no. Sometimes
> Saxon may be able to exploit knowledge that's not available to the user,
> sometimes the user may be able to exploit knowledge that's not available to
> Saxon.
> 
> >
> > One translation in more practical terms: would it be realistic to try
> > to perform binary search in a sorted sequence?
> 
> Yes, I think that's a reasonable thing to attempt.
> 
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/


transparent
Print
Mail
Like It
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