I agree.

Derek Chen-Becker wrote:
> I'd vote for closures. We use annotations for JPA because we have to, 
> but IMHO closures provide a nicer semantic approach because they 
> syntactically enclose the block where the action is occurring.
> 
> Derek
> 
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Jonas Bonér <jbo...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:jbo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     No perf difference. The annotations are turned into the same exact
>     closures.
> 
>     2009/5/29 Timothy Perrett <timo...@getintheloop.eu>:
>      >
>      >
>      > Are there any performance implications considering closures vs
>     annotations?
>      > Agreed that closures are more "lift like" however.
>      >
>      > Cheers, Tim
>      >
>      > On 29/05/2009 10:21, "marius d." <marius.dan...@gmail.com
>     <mailto:marius.dan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>      >
>      >>
>      >> I think that would be really good. But I'd rather not use
>     annotations.
>      >> Personally I find closures approach a much better fit here.
>      >>
>      >> withTxRequired {
>      >>   ... // do transational stuff
>      >>
>      >> }
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> Br's,
>      >> Marius
>      >>
>      >> On May 29, 11:55 am, Jonas Bonér <jbo...@gmail.com
>     <mailto:jbo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>      >>> Hi guys.
>      >>>
>      >>> I have been talking with David Pollak the rest of the lift team
>     about
>      >>> adding JTA to Lift. I have implemented that for a product
>     written in
>      >>> Scala some time ago. Now some of that code is OSS
>      >>> at:http://github.com/jboner/skalman/tree
>      >>>
>      >>> We used using two different APIs.
>      >>> 1. Annotations (would require Lift to support proxied objects, e.g.
>      >>> grab them from a factory):
>      >>>
>      >>> @TransactionAttribute(REQUIRED)
>      >>> def transactionalMethod = { ... }
>      >>>
>      >>> 2. Call-by-name:
>      >>>
>      >>> withTxRequired {
>      >>>   ... // do transational stuff
>      >>>
>      >>> }
>      >>>
>      >>> But I don't know what fits Lift and would like to know how you guys
>      >>> would like to have JTA integrated.
>      >>> At which level? Which APIs? Etc.
>      >>>
>      >>> --
>      >>> Jonas Bonér
>      >>>
>      >>> twitter: @jboner
>      >>> blog:    http://jonasboner.com
>      >>> work:  http://crisp.se
>      >>> work:  http://scalablesolutions.se
>      >>> code:  http://github.com/jboner
>      >> >
>      >>
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > >
>      >
> 
> 
> 
>     --
>     Jonas Bonér
> 
>     twitter: @jboner
>     blog:    http://jonasboner.com
>     work:   http://crisp.se
>     work:   http://scalablesolutions.se
>     code:   http://github.com/jboner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to