This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: Designs for XSLT functions (Was: Re: RE: syntax sugar for call-template)
- To: <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>
- Subject: RE: Designs for XSLT functions (Was: Re: [xsl] RE: syntax sugar for call-template)
- From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay at iclway dot co dot uk>
- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:44:40 -0000
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> > Yes, but the conditional construct cannot be an extension
> function since
> > a function call in XPath evaluates all its parameter
> *before* entering
> > the function.
>
> Not necessarily; XSLT and XPATH give implementors considerable
> latitude wrt evaluation strategies. I suspect that most XSLT
> processors already use lazy evaluation to some degree.
Yes indeed. Saxon currently pre-evaluates all the arguments in the case of
an extension function, but for built-in functions it passes the unevaluated
expression and leaves the function implementation to decide when and how to
evaluate the argument.
Mike Kay
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list