- From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 15:23:26 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > / James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say: > > > | in section 2 Pipeline Concepts it states; > | > | 'The result of evaluating a pipeline (or subpipeline) is the result of > | evaluating the steps that it contains, in an order consistent with the > | connections between them. A pipeline must behave as if it evaluated > | each step each time it occurs. Unless otherwise indicated, > | implementations must not assume that steps are functional (that is, > | that their outputs depend only on their inputs, options, and > | parameters) or side-effect free.' > | > | wondering if this is too limiting a paragraph with respect to possible > | future optimizations ... for example, does the above term 'evaluated' > | include simplifying a multi-container step to a container step, when > | static analysis reveals that a certain logic branch (e.g. xpath > | condition) is never satisfied. > > No, the magic phrase is "must behave as if". If static analysis reveals > (correctly :-)) that only one branch of a choose *can ever happen* then > discarding all the other branches and simplifying the step will *behave > as if* each step was evaluated. At least, that's my understanding. I was reading it this way, but uncertain ... thank you for the clarification. regards, Jim Fuller
Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 13:24:07 UTC