- From: Michael Sokolov <sokolov@falutin.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 21:52:08 -0500
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: John Lumley <john@saxonica.com>, EXPath ML <public-expath@w3.org>
On 11/14/13 8:53 PM, Jirka Kosek wrote: > On 14.11.2013 17:17, Michael Sokolov wrote: >> I'm sorry, I don't think I was clear. What I meant was >> >> |bin:pack-integer|(|$in|| as ||xs:integer|, |$size|| as ||xs:integer|)| >> as ||xs:base64Binary >> >> could be >> >> | >> |bin:pack-integer|(|$in|| as ||xs:integer|*, |$size|| as ||xs:integer|)| >> as ||xs:base64Binary| >> >> which would pack a sequence of integers, one after the other, into a binary > I see. We have tried to keep function simple, yet powerful enough if > combined together. Do you have any real use-case where long sequences of > integers have to be packed at once? No - this was mere idle speculation. I can certainly imagine someone reading sensor data from a satellite imaging array, or unpacking the pixels of an uncompressed image file, but I admit this is probably a bit off the beaten track, and certainly isn't something I need to do. In any case, it seems as if the way is open to a future extension of this sort if the need arises; existing function calls would continue to work. -Mike
Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 02:52:57 UTC