←back to thread

XSLT – Native, zero-config build system for the Web

(github.com)
392 points _kush | 1 comments | 27 Jun 25 05:00 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
badmintonbaseba ◴[27 Jun 25 08:37 UTC] No.44394985[source]▶
I have worked for a company that (probably still is) heavily invested in XSLT for XML templating. It's not good, and they would probably migrate from it if they could.

  1. Even though there are newer XSLT standards, XSLT 1.0 is still dominant. It is quite limited and weird compared to the newer standards.

  2. Resolving performance problems of XSLT templates is hell. XSLT is a Turing-complete functional-style language, with performance very much abstracted away. There are XSLT templates that worked fine for most documents, but then one document came in with a ~100 row table and it blew up. Turns out that the template that processed the table is O(N^2) or worse, without any obvious way to optimize it (it might even have an XPath on each row that itself is O(N) or worse). I don't exactly know how it manifested, but as I recall the document was processed by XSLT for more than 7 minutes.
JS might have other problems, but not being able to resolve algorithmic complexity issues is not one of them.
replies(9): >>44395187 #>>44395285 #>>44395306 #>>44395323 #>>44395430 #>>44395839 #>>44396146 #>>44397330 #>>44398324 #
mark_and_sweep ◴[27 Jun 25 09:36 UTC] No.44395306[source]▶
From my experience, most simple websites are fine with XSLT 1.0 and don't experience any performance problems.
replies(1): >>44395358 #
1. badmintonbaseba ◴[27 Jun 25 09:45 UTC] No.44395358[source]▶
Sure, performance might never become a problem, it is relatively rare. But when it does there is very little you can do about it.