> From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Is there any interest in integrating Cocoon with pizza Java
Compiler?
> > http://pizzacompiler.sourceforge.net
> >
> > My observations about it so far are:
> > 1. Compiled byte code is almost iden
> From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
> >All,
> >
> >Is there any interest in integrating Cocoon with pizza Java Compiler?
> >http://pizzacompiler.sourceforge.net
> >
> >My observations about it so far are:
> >1. Compiled byte code is almost identical to
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
> > From: giacomo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >
> > > Ok,
> > >
> > > sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
> > > become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generation.
> >
> > The la
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Is there any interest in integrating Cocoon with pizza Java Compiler?
> http://pizzacompiler.sourceforge.net
>
> My observations about it so far are:
> 1. Compiled byte code is almost identical to Sun's compiler output.
> 2. It is 450 Kb in size, comparing wi
On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> > From: giacomo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >
> > > Ok,
> > >
> > > sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
> > > become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generati
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>All,
>
>Is there any interest in integrating Cocoon with pizza Java Compiler?
>http://pizzacompiler.sourceforge.net
>
>My observations about it so far are:
>1. Compiled byte code is almost identical to Sun's compiler output.
>2. It is 450 Kb in size, comparing with 4.7Mb o
Vadim,
>Is there any interest in integrating Cocoon with pizza Java Compiler?
>http://pizzacompiler.sourceforge.net
Never heared of that...
>My observations about it so far are:
>1. Compiled byte code is almost identical to Sun's compiler output.
>2. It is 450 Kb in size, comparing with 4.7Mb o
All,
Is there any interest in integrating Cocoon with pizza Java Compiler?
http://pizzacompiler.sourceforge.net
My observations about it so far are:
1. Compiled byte code is almost identical to Sun's compiler output.
2. It is 450 Kb in size, comparing with 4.7Mb of javac.
3. Startup time is fast
> From: giacomo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> > Ok,
> >
> > sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
> > become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generation.
>
> The last major rewrite has introduced a boost in
On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Ok,
>
> sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
> become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generation.
The last major rewrite has introduced a boost in slownes.
> Clearly, developping on cocoon with 20 seconds del
On Thu, 07 Feb 2002 09:46:58 -0500, Berin Loritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
> >>>Moreover, I'd love to be able to decide what to use (interpreted or
> >>>compiled) from cocoon.xconf or, in case the treeprocessor ends
> >>>
> > up
> >
> >>>faster all the time, si
Jason Foster wrote:
>
>
>> Just to make things clear : sitemap is only one of the possible uses
>> of the TreeProcessor : it's a generic framework for implementing
>> pipeline assembly languages (hence "Processor") with an evaluation
>> tree (hence "Tree").
>>
>> The supported languages are d
> From: Jason Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
>
> > Just to make things clear : sitemap is only one of the possible uses
of
> > the TreeProcessor : it's a generic framework for implementing
pipeline
> > assembly languages (hence "Processor") with an evaluation tree
(hence
> > "Tree").
> >
> Just to make things clear : sitemap is only one of the possible uses of
> the TreeProcessor : it's a generic framework for implementing pipeline
> assembly languages (hence "Processor") with an evaluation tree (hence
> "Tree").
>
> The supported languages are defined in treeprocessor.xconf
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>Ok,
>
>sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
>become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generation.
>
>Clearly, developping on cocoon with 20 seconds delays between changes is
>a nightmare and would scare people away instantly.
>
>Now
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>>>Moreover, I'd love to be able to decide what to use (interpreted or
>>>compiled) from cocoon.xconf or, in case the treeprocessor ends
>>>
> up
>
>>>faster all the time, simply blast the compiled version and get rid
>>>
> of
>
>>>that stupid javac!
>>>
>>+1
I like
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> > Ok,
> >
> > Now that we have a functional interpreted sitemap engine, I
> > suggest we
> > move this on the main trunk and keep improving on it from there.
> +1
+1
> > Also, I would like to propose a name change: TreeProcessor isn't
> >
> Ok,
>
> Now that we have a functional interpreted sitemap engine, I
> suggest we
> move this on the main trunk and keep improving on it from there.
+1
>
> Also, I would like to propose a name change: TreeProcessor isn't
> exactlyself-explanatory as a 'sitemap interpreter'.
+1
>
> Moreov
> Ok,
>
> sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
> become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generation.
>
> Clearly, developping on cocoon with 20 seconds delays between changes is
> a nightmare and would scare people away instantly.
>
> Now that we have a funct
Yes,
that's kool +1 for the tree-procressor
~Gerhard
Stefano
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> Ok,
>
> sitemap code generation is getting slower every day and is likely to
> become worse as we add more bugfixes and error generation.
>
> Clearly, developping on cocoon with 20 seconds delays between changes is
> a nightmare and would scare people away instantl
21 matches
Mail list logo
