No objections here. Just to recap: The data model interfaces stay as they are, we only introduce the convention that we'll never return an XDMSequence from next().
Is that right? It seems like we should have a way to check that this is the case (at least at runtime in some kind of debug mode). What do think? Till On Jan 5, 2010, at 9:12 PM, Vinayak Borkar wrote: > Guys, > > > Currently there is a value called XDMSequence that can represent a complete > sequence in one Java Object. Originally this seemed like a good idea -- it > reduces the number of next calls where iterators can send values directly > from their producers (The FLWOR from the returnExpr, for eg). > > However, this makes other code a lot more complicated -- Iterators that use > the value have to inspect the data and act appropriately if the object is a > sequence object. In my opinion, this outweighs the benefits it offers. So I > am planning to eliminate the sequence object as a value that can be returned > in the iterator stream (next()) call. > > It will still continue to exist to be used with evaluateEagerly(). > > Thoughts/Objections? > > Thanks, > Vinayak
