I've heard that string-length() can get expensive because of
multi-byte characters, although I would've thought translate()
sufferered from the same problem...
I think few people are likely to notice the difference, but it is worth
being aware that string-length() might take linear time rather than constant
time because of the need to look for surrogate pairs. Of course this is very
implementation-dependent.
However, if you're testing the result of a translate() operation, I would
think that the cost of calling string-length() is almost certainly less than
the cost of calling translate().
Michael Kay
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--