- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:14:31 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14152
Ghislain Fourny <ghislain.fourny@flworfound.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ghislain.fourny@flworfound.
| |org
--- Comment #1 from Ghislain Fourny <ghislain.fourny@flworfound.org> 2011-09-22 12:14:30 UTC ---
There might be a technical issue with the fact that there is no evaluation
order in XPath 3.0 as far as I know. Even if the function item returned by
fn:enumerator is annotated as non-deterministic (i.e., can return a different
result for each call), if I am correct, the following query:
let $enumerator := fn:enumerator((1,2))
return ($enumerator(), $enumerator())
may lead to the result 1 2, but also to the result 2 1, which the user cannot
control, as there is no constraint about the order in which the operands of the
sequence expression are evaluated (there is only a spatial order for the
concatenation of their results).
This function might require the XQuery Scripting WD - unless if it is okay to
lose the input sequence order? Are there use cases requiring order
preservation?
--
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 Thursday, 22 September 2011 12:14:33 UTC