"Frank D. Greco" wrote:
> At 02:50 PM 11/9/99 -0800, James Todd wrote:
> >jsp's are optionally post-processed into servlets after which
> >all subsequent executions offer all the benifits of a servlet ...
> >cuz it *is* a servlet.
>
> "Optionally"? hmmmm... does the JSP spec say that JSP's
> *must* be post-processed into servlets, or is it up to
> the JSP implementor?
Among many other places, see section 3.2 of the JSP 1.1pr2 specification:
"The JSP page implementation class will implement
Servlet and the Servlet protocol will be used to
deliver requests to the class."
so it's not optional. The 1.0 spec wasn't quite so clear cut as this.
> After all, the spec does allow other
> source languages, which implies a Java servlet might
> not be generated.
>
Support for different scripting languages doesn't have a lot to do with the
characteristics of the generated page. For example, if you wanted to
implement a JSP container for language "foo", here's at least a couple of
approaches you could take:
* Translate all scriptlets written in "foo" into their corresponding
Java equivalents, and embed them in the generated class.
* Leave the scriptlets in language "foo", and call a "foo"
interpreter at runtime (embedded in the JSP container)
to execute the desired logic.
>
> Frank G.
Craig McClanahan
___________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff SERVLET-INTEREST".
Archives: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/servlet-interest.html
Resources: http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/external-resources.html
LISTSERV Help: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/user/user.html
