On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 04:51, Attila Szegedi wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason van Zyl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Velocity Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: 2002. m�rcius 13. 18:55
> Subject: Re: Velocity Compiler
> 
> 
> > On Wed, 2002-03-13 at 05:19, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I guess the question is - is there any point to doing this? :)  It's not
> > > clear to me what kind of real performance improvements can be realized
> by
> > > compiling, because once the template is intepreted, it's bytecode,
> right?
> >
> > The AST is bytecode, but I believe the compiled form of a template would
> > be different in that the reflection would be removed and if types place
> > in the context were immutable then I believe the compiler would make
> > things faster.
> >
> 
> This simply can't be done without seriously limiting Velocity functionality.

I honestly don't believe so. I certainly wouldn't make the immutability
mandatory but I still believe that the types in the context don't change
for the most part.

> For *full* compilation into bytecode, you need a strongly typed language,
> and not the loosely typed scripting-language like philosophy Velocity
> sports, period. The Tea template engine compiles to bytecode, and its syntax
> indeed features strongly typed template variables.

I believe that both methods could work. But I haven't had time to play
around and won't for a while so I won't bring it up again until I have
it working ;-)

> Cheers,
>   Attila.
> 
> --
> Attila Szegedi
> home: http://www.szegedi.org
> 
> 
> > --
> > jvz.
> >
> > Jason van Zyl
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > http://tambora.zenplex.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-- 
jvz.

Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://tambora.zenplex.org


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to