Re: xsl/xalan problem

Thanks for the fast reply :)

Then how would you advise to implement such a system?
I really need to get some input during the transformation.

Adrian.

On 6/30/2010 7:52 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>   XSLT is a functiional language. The order and frequency of execution,
> including execution of extensions, is not guaranteed by XSLT, or by
> Xalan, and depends on the details of code optimization and execution.
>
> You can constrain order by creating data dependencies. If each extension
> call is passed data from a previous extension call, that will force them
> to be executed in that sequence.
>
> You really can't constrain frequency. You are strongly advised not to
> write stateful extensions. Keep state in data.
>
>
> ______________________________________
> "... Three things see no end: A loop with exit code done wrong,
> A semaphore untested, And the change that comes along. ..."
> -- "Threes" Rev 1.1 - Duane Elms / Leslie Fish (
> http://www.ovff.org/pegasus/songs/threes-rev-11.html
> <http://www.ovff.org/pegasus/songs/threes-rev-11.html> )
>
>
> From: 	Adrian Herscu <[email protected]>
> To: 	[email protected]
> Date: 	06/30/2010 12:20 PM
> Subject: 	xsl/xalan problem
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Consider the following scenario:
>
> +-----------+ +----------------+ +------------+
> | Input XML |-->| XSLT Processor |-->| Output XML |
> +-----------+ +----------------+ +------------+
> ^ ^
> | |
> +----------------+ +-----------------+
> | Input XSL | | Runtime Input |
> +----------------+ +-----------------+
>
> The Output XML depends on three sources:
> 1. Input XML
> 2. Input XSL
> 3. ...and on the Runtime Input
>
> Currently, I am getting the Runtime Input using a specially designed
> extension function. The problem with this approach is that the XSLT
> Processor sometimes calls my extension function too many times. I have
> been told that this may happen if the XSLT Processor decides to optimize
> some of the XSL templates and that I cannot control this behavior. Is
> there a better approach?
>
> Thanks for your help,
> Adrian.
>
>