[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I see your point. On the other hand, it is a matter of
versioning even if output is routed back to input where the
cycle count identifies the version. Many models of NLDS
are viewpoint-dependent.
Careful though; we'll go down the rathole of first cause.
len
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) scripsit:
> What you are describing is what is sometimes called,
> "self-modifying code". I've been taught that self-modifying
> code isn't safe code and I've accepted that as an
> article of faith, so I can't verify that with facts.
> Still if so, what I would ask is if XML
> and XSLT (modify by transformation) is safer
> than when done in other languages and if so, why?
XSLT programs of this type are not *self*-modifying. Rather, they modify
other code that happens to resemble themselves. It is then up to something
outside the XSLT environment to re-execute the modified code.
This is no more a case of self-modification than when a compiler compiles a
modified version of itself: the new compiler must be put into effect by
something outside itself, typically an installation routine.
|
