i agree with you on the CDI topic. but would a change, as proposed by howard, change the performance characteristics as described by http://ptrthomas.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/perfbench-update-tapestry-5-and-grails/?
would the benchmark be improved? i'd expect, that at least the memory consumption would decrease. especially when comparing with wicket, i'd like to have a unique selling proposition. before the benchmark i was always arguing - as documented - that Tapestry 5 would achieve better performance (speed, memory) characteristics because of its "static structure - dynamic behaviour" paradigm. now after the benchmark i don't see this argument hold anymore. (or maybe s so again, would such a change improve T5 in such a way we could outperform any other web framework in a certain area? g, kris "Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo" <[email protected]> 20.01.2010 13:55 Bitte antworten an "Tapestry development" <[email protected]> An "Tapestry development" <[email protected]> Kopie Thema Re: Thought experiment: shared pages/components On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:21:35 -0200, Piero Sartini <[email protected]> wrote: > I think making tapestry-ioc a portable extension is the way to go. I agree. ;) -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer, and instructor Owner, software architect and developer, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda. http://www.arsmachina.com.br --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
