- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:13:52 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5810 --- Comment #9 from Michael Dyck <jmdyck@ibiblio.org> 2008-06-30 20:13:51 --- [Personal response] (In reply to comment #8) > Do you have an opinion on whether > > count(fn:error()) > > is 1, Under a strict evaluation, the expression always raises a dynamic error, so the question is more like "Is an implementation allowed to rewrite the expression into one that always returns 1?". I believe the answer is yes, but really it's allowed to rewrite it into *anything*. That is, when the original expression raises an error, the XQuery rewrite rules don't constrain the value/error resulting from the rewritten expression. (The classic example being an implementation that returns 42 for the expression 1 div 0. It's allowed, but frowned upon.) If the question is whether it's a "reasonable" or "defensible" rewrite, I'm not sure. Although FS 8.4 says quantifier(none) = 1 it's doing so in the context of defining a particular pseudo-function for use in particular rules. Applying it elsewhere isn't guaranteed to give meaningful results. (Note that FS 8.4 also says quantifier(empty) = ? which could lead to some bad inferences if mis-applied.) > and whether (more generally) it is permitted to count a function whose > argument has quantifier 1 without evaluating it? If an implementation can prove (via quantifiers or whatever) that a particular call to fn:count() would, if evaluated, either raise an error or return 1, then I believe it is permitted (among other things) to yield 1 for that expression in all cases. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 30 June 2008 20:14:25 UTC