There are two complementary functions empty($seq) and exists($seq).
I would expect any decent optimizer to generate exactly the same code
for these as for count($x)=0 - but I guess there are processors out
there that don't have decent optimizers.
Michael Kay
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of
Dimitre Novatchev
Sent: 04 October 2003 22:00
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: [xsl] XPath/XSLT 2.0: What is the most efficient way
to find if a sequence is empty?
In XSLT/XPath 1.0 one would use:
not($node-set)
to find if $node-set is the empty node-set.
However, the same test on a sequence in XPath 2.0:
not($seq)
may return 'true' for a non-empty sequence -- e.g. for:
( false() )
or for
(0)
My question: Is there a more efficient test for an empty sequence than
count($seq) = 0
=====
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list