Subject: Re: [xsl] Getting WordprocessingML p style From: Florent Georges <darkman_spam@xxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 21:42:01 +0100 (CET) |
David Carlisle wrote: Hi > It isn't just the cardinality rules that are different, > the way comparing values of different types are handled > differs as well, with = being more lenient than eq (and > even more lenient in backward compatibilty mode). Yes I know. And I know that when I write either eq or =. But I like to allow just the "lenientness" I need. Just the genericity I need. Because it is that, when comparing two atomic values, = is more generic, it accepts more values to be compared than eq. I need compiler and runtime help to detect my errors as soon as possible. For example, when I have to compare an untyped value taken from a node to an integer, I will use eq and xs:integer(). More to type, but more checks. Until I know I need instead to be lenient. But I need more help than you from the compiler ;-) > Generally speaking I find the = behaviour more natural, > and easier to type (which is an important consideration:-) :-) Regards, --drkm ___________________________________________________________________________ Dicouvrez une nouvelle fagon d'obtenir des riponses ` toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expiriences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Riponses http://fr.answers.yahoo.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Getting WordprocessingML , David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Getting WordprocessingML , David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] Saxon auto-recognition of, Florent Georges | Date | Re: [xsl] Getting WordprocessingML , David Carlisle |
Month |