> Note that Liam wrote "using explicit typing on variables". > As I read it, he claims that XSLT 2.0 can be executed more efficiently
> than XSLT 1.0 when the XSLT code is statically typed using XML Schema, > likely because runtime optimisation of untyped In 99% of cases a couple of algorithm fixes will do much better than tons of all that low-level optimizations. So I don't believe in all that "typed variables" stuff, especially relatively to modern processors. Yeah, it can(!) sometimes(!) give you +10% speed, but hey! I can get +700% speed on a cheap multicore Opteron by simple adding threads. And then I'll get 1000% over that by implementing a VERY basic caching. And someone is going to make me play all that "typed/untyped" games now? Which is particulary funny with Java, btw. I don’t buy it, wait 3 years or more and then retry. XSLT1 have some limitations, but I have a bunch of inexpensive HTML-coders working with it, and they are as hapy as my programers are, working with pure XML. XSLT2 will make our life a bit easier, perhaps, but it will change nothing in general. So I'm currently focused on the core task: make libxslt as fast, as it should be from the start.
_______________________________________________ xslt mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/XSLT/ xslt@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xslt
