The basic comparision has failed so.. u want alternative comparison...(real world) well try it yourself... good examples are "String Comparison", "generating dynamic variables". Any which way its going to fail.. due to the "Java Strong Language Type". If it was 20ms and 100ms... nobody really cares. we could all sit back and say oh.. i write 4 lines of code in CF and you write 20lines in JSP.....whatever..(20ms and 3135ms is some difference) I dont know if everbody missed this one.... loops=1000000; for(x=0;x<=loops;x=x+1) // this "<=loops" took double the time..(8-9 seconds) What if you just had to do the same 10 times in multiple pages creating variables or something of that sort. (Perhaps the argument will be.. oh the user is not going to know the difference...whatever.. we can argue about this all day)
> I was going to leave this alone, but I agree completely with Matt here. It > would be much more interesting and useful to see a comparison between a > real-world CFML page and its JSP counterpart. This all comes down to the fact that the CFMX compiler could be optimized to produce more of an optimized code OR have strong type(int, double) as an option for developers who think they need them. (others just ignore it and stick with old style code) Joe > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:15 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: FW: Jsp Vs Cfm (CFMX) -- Test Code > > > > > Sure, but it doesn't seem like optimizing this specific > > > case is really going to help anyone in the real world. > > > > Aw, c'mon Matt, that's not the point, and you know it! > > I was going to leave this alone, but I agree completely with Matt here. It > would be much more interesting and useful to see a comparison between a > real-world CFML page and its JSP counterpart. > > > There are certain things that can benefit from optimization, > > frequently executed loops or other iterative processes are > > prime targets. > > > > ... > > > > But the CFMX compiler could do better, especially where it > > will have the greatest impact. > > At what cost could it do better? I suspect that this may be more difficult > than it sounds on its face. CFML allows you to do all sorts of > things, like > create variables at runtime, evaluate strings as expressions, and so on, > with on-the-fly compilation and caching. > > > You can do just so much with best practices. > > > > Coding time-sensitive routines in Java or JSP may not be an > > option for everyone. > > Every tool will have advantages and disadvantages. I think it's a foolish > venture to try to build a tool that does everything well. Want to write > easily-maintainable code quickly? Use a scripting language, like > CFML. Want > to write an efficient calculation engine? Use something else. > Want the best > of both worlds? Use each tool appropriately, to build a unified solution. > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ > voice: (202) 797-5496 > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > ::::::::::::: dream :: design :: develop ::::::::::::: > MXDC 02 :: Join us at this all day conference for > designers & developers to learn tips, tricks, best > practices and more for the entire Macromedia MX suite. > > September 28, 2002 :: http://www.mxdc02.com/ > (Register today, seats are limited!) > :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
