Intrinsically one would expect copy-of to be a bit faster than a recursive
descent applying template rules to every node, but of course the actual
answer for a particular product (and source document) can only be obtained
by measurement. It may depend on how many other template rules there are.
If you have a performance problem, I think that any difference here is
unlikely to be the solution to it. (And if you don't, why trouble yourself?)
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: Werner, Wolfgang [mailto:mail(_at_)wolfgang-werner(_dot_)net]
Sent: 05 October 2004 09:45
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: [xsl] copy vs. copy-of performance in xsltproc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
has any of you experience regarding the performance of copy
compared to
copy-of in xsltproc?
Right now I'm copying some parts of the source tree completly while
filtering some other parts.
I use the following template:
~ <xsl:template match="/ | @* | node()">
~ <xsl:copy>
~ <xsl:apply-templates select="@* | node()"/>
~ </xsl:copy>
~ </xsl:template>
My question is, if I want to copy a complete element, is it
faster to use
~ <xsl:template match='dontfilterme'>
~ <xsl:copy-of select='.'/>
~ </xsl:template>
or the default template above?
How much does the complexity of the copied element influence
the speed?
Any pointers appreciated,
Wolfgang
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBYl8JqjaicDyx8o8RAtBrAJ91d6Xl6aWTPlx237bBzlsvAP4/ZgCfYla/
UbqeRlsJgfxzdOZ9jLmDE4U=
=/bpn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--+------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail:
<mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--+--