W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > May 2008

Re: processing steps every time

From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 15:23:26 +0200
Message-ID: <a0ad8ffe0805020623qf201f51mb54e949a63e9f24b@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> / James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say:
>
>
> | in section 2 Pipeline Concepts it states;
>  |
>  | 'The result of evaluating a pipeline (or subpipeline) is the result of
>  | evaluating the steps that it contains, in an order consistent with the
>  | connections between them. A pipeline must behave as if it evaluated
>  | each step each time it occurs. Unless otherwise indicated,
>  | implementations must not assume that steps are functional (that is,
>  | that their outputs depend only on their inputs, options, and
>  | parameters) or side-effect free.'
>  |
>  | wondering if this is too limiting a paragraph with respect to possible
>  | future optimizations ... for example, does the above term 'evaluated'
>  | include simplifying a multi-container step to a container step, when
>  | static analysis reveals that a certain logic branch (e.g. xpath
>  | condition) is never satisfied.
>
>  No, the magic phrase is "must behave as if". If static analysis reveals
>  (correctly :-)) that only one branch of a choose *can ever happen* then
>  discarding all the other branches and simplifying the step will *behave
>  as if* each step was evaluated. At least, that's my understanding.

I was reading it this way, but uncertain ... thank you for the clarification.

regards, Jim Fuller
Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 13:24:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 2 May 2008 13:24:07 GMT