On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:

> 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.

We're using a different prefix because if we use a lift:xxx prefix, the
snippet execution machinery will be invoked on the attribute and we don't
want that.

I'm cool with do:par unless anyone has a better suggestion.



> 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
> >

Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to