Sorry replied to wrong email Sent from my iPad (excuse the terseness) David A Lee [email protected]
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 12:43 PM, "David Lee" <[email protected]> wrote: > > FYI working on build machine and store 2 today ... Let me know when you need > it back. > Maybe we need a store3;) > > > Sent from my iPad (excuse the terseness) > David A Lee > [email protected] > > >> On Jan 13, 2014, at 12:40 PM, "David Lee" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> This is the type of problem xmlsh and XProc were designed for ... >> What engine are you using? I personally prefer designing with lots of small >> programs instead of a monolith. This is practical only if the startup >> overhead for each is small and preferably if in memory data can be passed >> between steps. XProc, xmlsh, and most xquery database engines support this >> model efficiently. I find it so much easier to write and debug if I can >> work in small transformations and let the framework do the plumbing for me. >> >> >> Sent from my iPad (excuse the terseness) >> David A Lee >> [email protected] >> >> >>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 11:12 AM, "Ihe Onwuka" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I am running through about a gigabyte worth of xml documents. >>> >>> The ideal processing scenario is to offer each node in the sequence to >>> a list of filters and augment different XML documents (or different >>> branches of one encompassing document) based on the outcome of the >>> filter. >>> >>> If anyone has seen the example used to illustrate continuation passing >>> style in Chapter 8 of the Little Schemer that is exactly what I have >>> in mind (albeit not necessarily in continuation passing style). >>> >>> What I am doing at the moment is cycling through the nodes n times >>> where n is the number of filters I am applying. Clearly sub-optimal. >>> However it is not a priority to what I am actually doing (which is >>> simply to get the result rather than to do so performantly) so I am >>> not quite motivated enough to figure out how to do this. >>> >>> Hence I am asking instead what others have done in a similar scenario. >>> I suppose some sort of customised HOF entailing head/tail recursion >>> over the sequence and accepting a list of filter functions, would be >>> the likely form a solution would take. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> [email protected] >>> http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk >> >> _______________________________________________ >> [email protected] >> http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] > http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
