On Tue, 2007-30-01 at 08:12 +0000, Adam Jones wrote: > > > On Jan 29, 11:51 pm, Christoph Zwerschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Richard Clark wrote: > > > You have compared a bunch of high level web development frameworks, > > > whose express purpose is to make development of complex web > > > applications simple, by comparing their most basic performance metrics > > > as if they were HTTP servers. > > > > Exactly. You cannot make any really meaningful statements if you only > > look at static "Hello Word" examples. Neither about execution time nor > > about development time (as done in Joel Spolsky's nevertheless > > interesting screencasthttp://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov). > > Although it is now out of date (and does TG a huge disservice at this > point in time), that comparison is still worlds more useful than this > one in that it focuses on the right subject. Performance is (largely) > a solvable problem for web apps. Making web development easier is > still something that we are all exploring. Since that, and not raw > speed, is the focus of every platform on the list above, I would > advise anyone still looking for their solution to weigh out how their > chosen framework will help them get their app written, chances are > that you will have more tools than you need to handle performance when/ > if it becomes an issue.
Exactly. Or as I like to say: "You know what's REALLY fast? CGI in C!" ;) ;) - said with much love for C as a hobby audio and microcontroller hacker Iain --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
