Subject: RE: [xsl] logical and, and logical or From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:48:11 +0100 |
> But tell me, really, was this what you were looking for? A > function as a replacement of an operator? I suspect he was looking for an entry in the XPath 2.0 "Functions and Operators" book. Generally, all the first-order operators in the language have such an entry. Higher-order operators (such as "/", [], if/then/else) do not, because they deliver results that aren't strictly functions of the values of their arguments. Historically and+or were excluded for the same reason, because in XPath 1.0 they had strict early-exit semantics [(a=0 or 10 div a) was guaranteed not to give a divide-by-zero error]. Arguably they now have much the same semantics as other operators, in that you're allowed to avoid evaluating arguments that aren't needed, but you're not required to. However, no-one ever got round to adding them to F+O - and it's not strictly necessary. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] logical and, and logical , Dimitre Novatchev | Thread | RE: [xsl] logical and, and logical , Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] logical and, and logical , Wolfgang Jeltsch | Date | Re: [xsl] testing relationships bet, Wolfgang Jeltsch |
Month |