>From: "Martin Marinschek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Facelets are faster - the JSP overhead goes with them. Adam quoted 14%
> speed gains by using Facelets.
>
>
> Facelets are faster - the JSP overhead goes with them. Adam quoted 14%
> speed gains by using Facelets.
>
Is that metric a comparison of the time it takes to compile a JSP versus parsing the XML document or is that averaged out over several invocations?
Gary
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 4/18/06, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > Hi Werner!
> > > Jesse Alexander (KSFD 121) schrieb:
> > >
> > >> Do you mean replicating the tomahawk-components or different
> > >> components under the tomahawk-sign?
> > >>
> > > Different components, I have had this idea for some time now.
> > >
> > Sorry, I dont like this idea.
> >
> > I dont know, why you think facelets are speedier. They use exactly the
> > same renderer class, no?
> >
> > The only thing you win is not to have to write the tag class and a tld.
> > Its not worth to risk to have new components only work with facelets.
> >
> > Wasnt one of the ideas of JSF to allow a migration from JSP to JSF? We
> > shouldnt break it.
> > ;
> > But I admit having to write the html markup in an renderer is a pain.
> > What about a html2jsf converter which takes a html input file and
> > generates the out.write stuff?
> > Should be possible.
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Mario
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
> Martin
>
> On 4/18/06, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > Hi Werner!
> > > Jesse Alexander (KSFD 121) schrieb:
> > >
> > >> Do you mean replicating the tomahawk-components or different
> > >> components under the tomahawk-sign?
> > >>
> > > Different components, I have had this idea for some time now.
> > >
> > Sorry, I dont like this idea.
> >
> > I dont know, why you think facelets are speedier. They use exactly the
> > same renderer class, no?
> >
> > The only thing you win is not to have to write the tag class and a tld.
> > Its not worth to risk to have new components only work with facelets.
> >
> > Wasnt one of the ideas of JSF to allow a migration from JSP to JSF? We
> > shouldnt break it.
> > ;
> > But I admit having to write the html markup in an renderer is a pain.
> > What about a html2jsf converter which takes a html input file and
> > generates the out.write stuff?
> > Should be possible.
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Mario
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
