This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
count() vs. xsl:number (was: Measuring performance)
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: count() vs. xsl:number (was: Measuring performance)
- From: David_Marston at lotus dot com
- Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 10:04:12 -0400
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
While writing about performance measurement, Joe Ortiz said:
>Also, there are a few resources that indicate the efficiency
>of using certain commands over others (ie using count instead
>of xsl:number for certain applications).
If you have a situation where either count() or xsl:number
can do the job, I would certainly favor count!! I discourage
the use of xsl:number for simple counting, because it's so
big and featureful. It's purpose is to generate output
numbering when you need to display all individual items in
a set and number them. The count() function is simple and,
depending on the argument, may be able to take advantage of
prior counting activity that occurred.
.................David Marston
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list