- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 22:19:33 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4446 ------- Comment #6 from hrennau@yahoo.de 2007-06-17 22:19 ------- (In reply to comment #3) > I think the behaviour you're > concerned about is for the processor to *always* return true() for this > example. > ... > How about "... MUST NOT evaluate a branch that is not selected" ? It seems to me the problem is that the processor might skip the evaluation of the condition. If so, your proposal would less reliably enforce the execution, as compared to the wording of Michael Kay (if I understand it correctly, see comment #5). As an example, consider the case that the conditional expression is operand of the fn:count function, and that both branches consist of function calls whose signature guarantees exactly one result item. It seems to me that your wording would permit to rewrite the conditional expression as the expression "1", whereas the original proposal would not allow such a rewrite, because it would amount to returning the result of a branch that has not been selected.
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2007 22:19:38 UTC