On 15/03/2016 17:18, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
> On Friday, March 11, 2016 10:03 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>>
>> Monday works. I might try experimenting with some ideas between now and then
>> anyway.
>
> Hi again,
>
> A bit shorter reply this time, because of time shortage.
On Friday, March 11, 2016 10:03 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>
> Monday works. I might try experimenting with some ideas between now and then
> anyway.
Hi again,
A bit shorter reply this time, because of time shortage. I preferred to focus
the little time I managed to "break free" on testing
On 11/03/2016 19:00, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
> On Friday, March 11, 2016 6:07 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
> I'm wasn't talking about gathering information regarding performance. I was
> talking about gathering information about what jsp/tag code and what EL
> variable names
On Friday, March 11, 2016 6:07 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>
> And a debug log message is unlikely to tell you any more than the thread dump
> did.
That depends on what is actually being logged. If the class name is printed,
then one could immediately figure out the name of the EL variable
On 11/03/2016 14:17, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 10:44 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>>
>> We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. If you are concerned
>> about a performance issue then you need to know where to look to
>> enable debug logging. A
On Thursday, March 10, 2016 10:44 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>
> We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. If you are concerned
> about a performance issue then you need to know where to look to
> enable debug logging. A profiler will tell you where to look and
> at that point you don't need
On 10/03/2016 22:16, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> Mark,
>
> On 3/10/16 4:43 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> On 10/03/2016 21:16, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
>>> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:20 AM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
> 3. Why is the problem not limited to the first request
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark,
On 3/10/16 4:43 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 10/03/2016 21:16, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:20 AM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>>>
3. Why is the problem not limited to the first request for a
On 10/03/2016 21:16, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:20 AM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>> 3. Why is the problem not limited to the first request for a jsp
>>> page?
>>
>> Because EL imports may be dynamic so the EL has to be evaluated on
>> execution.
On Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:20 AM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>
> > 3. Why is the problem not limited to the first request for a jsp page?
>
> Because EL imports may be dynamic so the EL has to be evaluated on execution.
I'm not really sure I follow you now. Can you explain what you mean with
On 10/03/2016 10:19, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 10/03/2016 08:12, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
>> Then surely one can look at the other implementations, and what they did to
>> avoid this problem. But one thing off the top of my head would be to at
>> least avoid doing that class
On 10/03/2016 08:12, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 8:22 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
>> It is a known 'feature' of the new EL requirements added in 3.0. The EL
>> parser can't differentiate
>> between an attribute without a scope and a reference to an
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 8:22 PM, ma...@apache.org wrote:
> It is a known 'feature' of the new EL requirements added in 3.0. The EL
> parser can't differentiate
> between an attribute without a scope and a reference to an static field.
>
> See
On 09/03/2016 18:20, jimi.hulleg...@svensktnaringsliv.se wrote:
> Has anyone seen this problem before? What could be the cause of it?
It is a known 'feature' of the new EL requirements added in 3.0. The EL
parser can't differentiate between an attribute without a scope and a
reference to an
14 matches
Mail list logo
