s/arity/cardinality/
It’s late.
---
Ron Hitchens {[email protected]} +44 7879 358212
> On Aug 22, 2015, at 2:36 AM, Ron Hitchens <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> If you really do have a parameter with an arity of ?, then it won’t be
> function mapping. Function mapping only happens when a function parameter is
> specified to allow one-and-only-one. In that case it’s unambiguous to map
> each item in a sequence onto a function call. If a parameter is optional,
> then it isn’t.
>
> If you’re calling a function with more than one parameter, you could see
> function mapping on any of them. If any parameter is a singleton, function
> mapping can happen. A common trap is to pass a variable, which might be an
> empty sequence to a singleton parameter, which results in zero calls to the
> function.
>
> Or it could be namespaces.
>
> ---
> Ron Hitchens {[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>} +44 7879
> 358212
>
>> On Aug 21, 2015, at 5:56 PM, Hasegawa, Margarete
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I think function mapping is the most likely problem. Thanks for the
>> link documentation link.
>>
>> Maggie
>>
>> From: Justin Makeig <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Reply-To: MarkLogic Developer Discussion <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Date: Friday, August 21, 2015 12:54 PM
>> To: MarkLogic Developer Discussion <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Subject: Re: [MarkLogic Dev General] Failure to enforce occurrence
>> indicators in function signature
>>
>> You're likely running into function mapping
>> <http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/xquery/enhanced#id_55459
>> <http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/xquery/enhanced#id_55459>>.
>>
>> Justin
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 21, 2015, at 9:44 AM, Hasegawa, Margarete
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Has anyone experienced an issue with MarkLogic failing to enforce
>>> occurrence indicators in function calls? For example, a function expects
>>> xs:string? (meaning that the function is expecting either the empty
>>> sequence or a single node), but instead accepts multiple values and does
>>> not fail. We've observed that instead of raising a syntax error, ML will
>>> sometimes give unpredictable behavior instead. Could this be a bug?
>>>
>>> Many thanks!
>>> Maggie
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> General mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> Manage your subscription at:
>>> http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
>>> <http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> General mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> Manage your subscription at:
>> http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
>
_______________________________________________
General mailing list
[email protected]
Manage your subscription at:
http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
