- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 18:55:06 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14152 --- Comment #2 from Vladimir Nesterovsky <vladimir@nesterovsky-bros.com> 2011-09-23 18:55:06 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > 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: > ... 1. More correct definition of the enumerator function should be: fn:enumerator($items as item()*) as function() as item()?; fn:enumerator() returns a function item (which is non-determenistic) that returns optional item. 2. According to my reading of XQuery 3.0 WD (3.9.2 For Clause), and XPath 3.0 WD (3.8 For Expressions) one may write a code like a following to avoid the issue you're pointing to: let $enumerator := fn:enumerator((1,2)) return for $v1 in $enumerator(), $v2 in $enumerator() return ($v1, $v2) > Are there use cases requiring order preservation? I think such use cases do exist. -- 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 Friday, 23 September 2011 18:55:08 UTC