-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 You know... I think (as much as I'd like to see this just 'built in') this is a lot like saying "I'd like my source code editor/syntax highlighter/code completer to have source code integration" - it doesn't belong. What you need is an "Eclipse/Idea/Pick your IDE" that integrates the two.
Hmmm... Yeah... That would be an interesting endeavor. Time to work out something like this... Take that IDE to application-land. James Carman wrote: > It might be worth looking into OSCache for this. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian K. Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:20 AM > To: Tapestry development > Subject: Re: Tapestry 5 progress > > Works for me. Plenty of growing room for 4 left anyway, right Jesse? ;-) > I'm just hoping to get documentation (*ugh*) and tooling (Spindle) up to > speed before 5 hits. (feed the masses and all that :-)) > > In speaking of performance... (I'm off in dream land here, I know... but > I like it there sometimes) > > Many moons ago, there was talk of a 'tool' /'utility' that would > basically spider a Tapestry app and get all the generated HTML resulting > in basically a statically generated site. This helps tremendously when > you're running behind a web server that's tuned to serve static content > - it's what they do and they do it pretty well with no overhead past > itself (meaning no java, no db, etc). I'd like to see if we can't add > some sort of 'cache' attribute to the HTML (somewhere) that would allow > Tapestry to perform this type of "wait, it says to cache it - i've > already generated it, I'll just grab that and use it" processing. This > would also allow Tapestry to build on first access but write out the > generated HTML so the next time a request comes in for it, the web > server would find it first (outside the mapping for Tapestry). Granted > this would only work for pages that were "cache=true" and had no dynamic > components inside it, but for a lot of sites that's enough (especially > outside a 'user' area). If there's a static form, submitting it would > pass back to Tapestry for processing. > > I'd see this as only improving performance if you run Tapestry behind > something like Apache. Granted, you'd get a lot of "that's not fair - > you're not comparing our framework to yours if you don't hit your > framework more than once when we have to hit ours every time" > comments... but hey ;-) > > My .02 > Brian > > Howard Lewis Ship wrote: >>> The basic AOP infrastructure is coming along. I expect the rest to >>> ramp up pretty quickly once I get that in place, but we're still >>> talking months. Maybe a useable beta by year's end. >>> >>> I think I predicted a big performance boost for Tapestry 4 apps vs. >>> equivalent Tapestry 3 apps. I believe the difference between 4 and 5 >>> will be greater. In fact, I expect OGNL support to be an add on, and >>> the built-in code will be an improved version of tapestry-prop (from >>> Tapestry @ JavaForge). I want Tapestry to be extremely high >>> performance, as one of its differentiators from JSF and Rails. >>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) iD8DBQFET6noaCoPKRow/gARAikKAKDcEAfRIItqd4LgP5DBfqEv+mlgyACgm/Nu wL3sefySCxJKT0CsLBeykkI= =sF1X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
