> For a CFX that was written in Java and then moved to J#, what is the > difference in performance (for CFMX version)? > We haven't done any testing, but anecdotal evidence suggests that there is a noticeable performance improvement. I believe this is because the .NET CLR has a better JIT currently. Of course, it is possible that the small amount of overhead introduced by Black Knight will result in reduced performance as compared to Java-based CFXs. However, that should only be the case with CFXs that do very little work and the performance difference probably won't matter anyway.
I should note that Black Knight is designed to allow for more efficient integration with .NET, since to date integration with .NET has had to make use of COM. So while moving Java-based CFXs to J# is possible and sometimes preferable; it should be evaluated on a case by case basis. > This announcements means you can write CFX tags in .NET only, not that > you > can utilize any .NET assembly as is without writing a CFX wrapper, > right? > You are correct in that a CFX tag must be implemented in .NET. We have the ability to leverage the same technology to allow for a object type proxy, but that currently isn't available and we have no plans to provide it until there is sufficient demand. We feel that using the CFX API offers the most desired syntactical access pattern for people wanting to make use of .NET with CFML. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.MontaraSoftware.com (888) 408-0900 x901 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com
