On 4/12/06, Michael Kay <mike(_at_)saxonica(_dot_)com> wrote:
In this example there are many <a>'s to one <docBase>, so traversing
ancestor each time to retrieve the same value seems like a waste - if
there are 3 <a>'s, that means 3 trips up the same ancestor axis to get
the same value (I guess it probably gets optimized, but why rely on
that?) much better to store the value in a tunnelled parameter.
I wouldn't want to place a bet on which approach will be faster, but I
rather doubt the difference would be significant.
amazingly this is true
I've just ran a comparison on a set of 20,000 nodes and the results
were near identical....
I will now freely use ancestor with a clear conscience!
So how can getting the parent of each node in the ancestry be as fast
as essentially not getting the parent of each node (tunnelled
parameters cant cost anywhere near as much)? Is there trickery
involved?
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--