Hi Robert, I guess this is where my expertise drops off.
Wouldn't the Witango Server then have to operate like a mini-virtual machine of some sort? The Witango Server is currently just an executable for it's own code, with the ability to process external "scripts" (a.k.a. TAF, TCF, TML files) and return the output, which is why we have this wonderful interpreted language (Witango) in the first place. Converting code for use in an external Virtual Machine or CLR is one thing, but creating a whole new is another. Wouldn't we then loose the advantage of making our TCF Classes accessible by other external applications? Like I said, my experience doesn't take me this deep in the world of programming, so maybe I'm loosing sight of your objective here. Would the phrase "self-compiling" be more along the lines of what you are talking about? The only "self-compiling" environment I know if is the Mono-Project, which is an Open Source initiative to port the .NET Framework to *unix platforms. The compiler used in the Mono-Project is written in C# and can compile itself and other C# code - all on *unix. http://www.go-mono.com/ So, I suppose it's possible..... Scott Cadillac, Witango.org - http://witango.org 403-281-6090 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Information for the Witango Developer Community --------------------- XML-Extranet - http://xml-extra.net 403-281-6090 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Well-formed Development (for hire) --------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Garcia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Witango-Talk: Boosting Server Performance, and TCFs > > > Just because our tafs would be compiled in some native > format, doesn't > mean we would have to start worrying about things garbage collection. > The compiled tcf would would have in/out points and process data > within. It would run within the memory space of the witango > server, and > the server would handle the garbage collection and the nasty > stuff. The > main benefit would be that complex methods in a tcf would not be > scripted, but compiled so that there would be no tag > processing and the > other performance drags that are inherant with an interpreted > language. > It would mean, though, that certain things you can do in a > tml or taf, > you could not do, like dynamic referencing. > > Robert. > > On Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 09:49 AM, Scott Cadillac wrote: > > > But it does add several layers of complexity too. I'm not > an expert at > > this > > level by any means, but it seams to me that Witango isn't ready to > > support > > this kind of low-level environment (nor any interpreted > language for > > that > > matter, e.g., ColdFusion). > > > > For example, garbage collection and other memory allocation > issues - > > what > > sort of Metatags would we need for this? > > -- > > Robert Garcia > President - BigHead Technology > CTO - eventpix.com > 2781 N Carlmont Pl > Simi Valley, Ca 93065 > ph: 805.522.8577 - cell: 805.501.1390 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://bighead.net/ - http://eventpix.com/ - http://theradmac.com/ > > ______________________________________________________________ > __________ > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Go to http://www.witango.com/maillist.taf > ________________________________________________________________________ TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Go to http://www.witango.com/maillist.taf
