- From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 07:45:47 -0800
- To: public-xslt-40@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAK4KnZefTpALYxxvzMnZx71rrXX0XTJv-jq5hTGh-Evqb67QZA@mail.gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:03 AM Subject: Re: Types and Generics To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, Adam Retter <adam.retter@exquery.org>, Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com> Cc: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com> > But a fully worked specification (including, in particular, all the type subsumption rules) > is something that I don't have the energy (or probably the brain-power) for. Could you, please expand on this? Any examples of the "type subsumption rules" ? What do other developers / implementors think? @Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com> @Adam Retter <adam.retter@exquery.org> ? Thanks, Dimitre On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 2:48 AM Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote: > I've wondered about this; and internally, at a very simple level, Saxon > does have something a bit like this where we know, for example, that the > result of fn:reverse is the same type as the input. But a fully worked > specification (including, in particular, all the type subsumption rules) is > something that I don't have the energy (or probably the brain-power) for. > > Michael Kay > Saxonica > > On 30 Nov 2020, at 01:30, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com> wrote: > > Isn't it time to introduce generics? > > > fn:group-by($seq as $$T*, > > $fun as function($arg as $$T ) as $$V) > as map($$V, $$T+) > > Applies $fun on each of the items in $seq and groups the results by > value, in a map with an entry for each distinct produced value $v (as > key) and value - the sequence of all items $it in $seq such that $fun($it) > eq $v > > > Thanks, > Dimitre > > > >
Received on Monday, 30 November 2020 15:46:11 UTC