Could that be changed to lift:concurrent or lift:par etc. (see email on 
scala-user from Marting Odersky mentioned the future use of 'seq' and 'par' in 
concurrent collections)?
Why use a different prefix than everything else built in to lift? And 'lazy' is 
arguably not what's happening.
Thanks.


-------------------------------------
Jeppe Nejsum Madsen<je...@ingolfs.dk> wrote:


David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> writes:

> I've added code (it's in review board right now) that will automatically
> farm any snippet with the "do:lazy='true'" attribute set.
>
> So, <lift:foo/> will execute the foo snippet inline.
>
> <lift:foo do:lazy="true"/> will execute the foo snippet in parallel and join
> the result back to page before its rendered.

Very nice! In what context is the snippet executed? I assume that
all timeout handling, errors etc should be handled by the snippet just
as in the non-lazy fashion?

/Jeppe




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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