In order to use xsl:for-each, I'd have to dispose of something
generating a node-set based on my number, wouldn't I?
yes if you know that your input document (or stylesheet is big enough) a
common trick was to use
<xsl:for-each select="(//*)[position() <= Urmel]"....
which may not be any more efficient, but is a lot shorter.
in xslt2 you can go
<xsl:for-each select="1 to xs:integer(Urmel)"> ...
which is a bit nicer (it would be nicer still if you didn't have to
explicitly cast the range to an integer, but teh default casting would
lead to a double and (unlike say the arguments to substring)) the to
operator really wants an integer,
Or is this misguided optimization thinking in thinking that lots of
template invocations are bad?
If you write the recursive call as a tail recursive call as you have
done, then in most (I hope) XSLT systems this will be essentially
compiled to a loop an not take up the stack space that would naturally
implied by a deeply nested set of function calls.
David
________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs.
________________________________________________________________________
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--