[xquery-talk] xquery 3.1 wishlist

[Adam Retter]

On 28 June 2015 at 19:35, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote:
>> One more consideration: function calls seem to be more expensive than inline
>> expressions. And then there's that baggage of a custom library...
>
> Doesn't that depend on the implementation? Functions may e.g. be
> inlined and further compiled, and the evaluated expression may differ
> a lot from the original expression.
>

Agreed. That is entirely down to the specific implementation.
Different implementations offer different optimisations (or not). For
example loop-unrolling, TCO, DCE, etc, etc. Function Inlining is just
another optimisation that an implementation could offer where
appropriate.

>
>
>>
>> 2015-06-28 14:35 GMT+02:00 W.S. Hager <wshager at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Hmm, I'm not so sure. The if/else clause is pretty short as it is, and
>>> semantically more clear. But it's another discussion altogether.
>>>
>>> For me the paint points remain in array support/semantics. I thought it
>>> best to let it rest for a while and see if the workarounds proof to be
>>> feasible. I think I was too eager to address this in the first place.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Wouter
>>>
>>> 2015-06-28 0:07 GMT+02:00 Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> > Personally I would also like to see a ternary operator, but I haven't
>>>> > mentioned it until now ;-)
>>>>
>>>> +1 ;) But if I remember right, it has already been motivated and
>>>> discussed in the group before.
>>>>
>>>> Talking about conditions: An if expression without 'else' branch would
>>>> often be nice as well (if not present, an empty sequence could be
>>>> returned).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On 26 June 2015 at 12:18, W.S. Hager <wshager at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> Hello,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I've been working with the recent xquery 3.1 implementation in the
>>>> >> develop
>>>> >> branch eXist-db. I encountered some cases that were quite hard to work
>>>> >> around:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - the lack of array:index-of()
>>>> >> - the lack of the iterator index in arrayfor-each and related
>>>> >> higher-order
>>>> >> functions
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Perhaps someone of the workgroup is available to discuss those cases.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thanks,
>>>> >> Wouter
>>>> >> --
>>>> >>
>>>> >> W.S. Hager
>>>> >> Lagua Web Solutions
>>>> >> http://lagua.nl
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >>
>>>> >> W.S. Hager
>>>> >> Lagua Web Solutions
>>>> >> http://lagua.nl
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> talk at x-query.com
>>>> >> http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Adam Retter
>>>> >
>>>> > skype: adam.retter
>>>> > tweet: adamretter
>>>> > http://www.adamretter.org.uk
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > talk at x-query.com
>>>> > http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> W.S. Hager
>>> Lagua Web Solutions
>>> http://lagua.nl
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> W.S. Hager
>> Lagua Web Solutions
>> http://lagua.nl



-- 
Adam Retter

skype: adam.retter
tweet: adamretter
http://www.adamretter.org.uk