- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 10:01:48 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27648 --- Comment #2 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- Commenting on my own proposal, the difficulty with wrapping accumulator calls in functions is making the functions streamable; we can't replicate the static analysis we do on accumulator-after() if the call is hidden within a user-defined function. So I would like to explore b(2): replacing the functions accumulator-before() and accumulator-after() with a pair of instructions <xsl:accumulator-before name="a"/> and <xsl:accumulator-after name="a"/> (or a single instruction with an extra attribute if people prefer). Of course, there's a usability disadvantage, we all know how awkward it is to call xsl:number in any context except where you want to output the value directly into the result tree. But people know how to live with that. The advantages would be (a) the normal static binding rules can be used to handle overrides, (b) there's more scope for optimization and static error checking if the accumulator is identified statically (e.g. the type of the result is always statically known), (c) it slightly simplifies the streamability rules, e.g. rules 6 and 7 of 19.8.8.1 disappear. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2014 10:01:49 UTC