I've been following your discusiion with Michael here -- I'm curious
if you have any examples where RTF's in 1.0 are much faster than
the corresponding behavior in 2.0? It doesn't seem intuitive to me.
No, I do not have any examples; partly because I am speculating
instead of comparing implementations. However, an RTF can be
optimized for addition, while a node-set must allow fast traversal
and direct (XPath-addressed) access. Many RTFs are not used
as node-sets, thus this should make sense.
I know from experience that switching tree model in Saxon 6 changes
performance pattern. Instead of (or additionally to) having two
tree structures, it would make sense to use different tree structures
for node-sets and RTFs.
David Tolpin
http://davidashen.net/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list