----- Original Message -----
From: Manik Surtani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 12:46 AM
Subject: Turbine & JSPs
> How could the Turbine framework work with JSPs?
I am working on improving the JSP integration with Turbine. I have only got
so far as to clean up the WM/FM template code, so that it might be useful
for JSP's as well.
> Basically, I mean using
> JSPs strictly as an alternative to webmacro or freemarker ....
>
> And what are the pro's and cons of using these different template
> technologies?
>
Put simply:
WM has less functionality built into its template language. (Which some
consider to be just the right amount.) FM has a few more things like
functions, which some find very useful, but some consider too hard for a
designer to maintain.
WM uses introspection so that "normal" business objects can be accessed by
the template. FM requires that wrappers be written around your business
objects or Screens can store the values needed for display within the
context. I am not too familiar with JSP yet, but it seems the introspection
is limited to bean like properties.
JSP, of course, does nothing to limit including complex functionality within
the JSP template and in fact many use JSP's as an inverted servlet and
include all sorts of code in the template.
WM does a much better job of enforcing separation of content and function
than JSP and supports a wider range of objects (that are easy to access)
within the template. I estimate that JSP templates may be 2-3 times faster
on generating the response. But this estimate just assumes a JSP is as fast
as a servlet which uses out.print() to generate the response, I have not
tested this. Some limited testing I did between FM and WM showed that they
were similar in response time.
John McNally
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
