Re: About node references

Dimitre Novatchev wrote:

> >   1/ I still fail to see use cases that node refs would help
> > solving, if we had sequence refs (or nested sequences.)  If
> > node refs are plain strings, I understand they could be added
> > to an XML tree, but I can't see what that could solve that
> > nested sequences couldn't.

> Why, the Use Case we started with was Christopher Lange's problem
> with currying. Its solution is to save a node reference when
> currying and to deref it when all necessary additional arguments
> have been passed and the function should finally be evaluated.

  Yes, but that could be achieved with nested sequences, couldn't
it?  If I am right, we have the following ideas for now:

  1/ nested sequences: the ability to create more complex structure
that the "flat sequences" in standard XPath 2.0, using sequence
references; those refs are of a specific type, and cannot be added
to a tree;

  2/ node refs, NOT implemented as strings: IMHO a specific case of
idea 1/;

  3/ node refs, implemented as strings: could be added to a tree,
and then dereferenced later (with garbage collection potential
issues.)

  If I am right, you are thinking about 3/ above with currying,
while I think this could be solved also by 1/.  And I can't think
of a use case that would be solved by 3/ but at the same time
couldn't be solved by 1/.

  Did I miss something?

  Regards,

-- 
Florent Georges
http://www.fgeorges.org/