I believe Scott is working on this for 1.3, he can probably give more info
than I can. I'm strictly speaking about WW 2.0.

-Pat

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Velocity as the UI widgets [WW 2.0]


> Given that for some of us the dev meeting is at an unearthly hour of the
> morning :) (I am at GMT + 9.5) I'll comment here.
>
> Please can we have this in WW 1.3 ? What will it mean in terms of jars
> needed in our web application ?
>
>
> On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 17:17, Patrick Lightbody wrote:
> > I just ran some tests, inspired by Scotts work on getting Velocity in
place
> > for the UI tags. I took it one step further and got rid rd.include()
> > entirely (Like Scott had mentioned) and the performance boost was
icredible.
> >
> > Basically, if we lock down to using velocity for the -UI tags- (note,
this
> > means that JSP views would still work), we get like a 10X performance
> > increase as well as a huge scaling increase. I mean, it's so huge that
it
> > would be dumb for us not to take it. And mind you, I ran these tests on
> > Orion and Resin, two of the fastest JSP implementations.
> >
> > So I'm going to un-propose my suggestion about using SiteMesh for the UI
> > tags and instead propose that we stick 100% to only supporting
> > velocity-based taglibs. Your JSP views will still look and act exactly
the
> > same:
> >
> > ....
> > <ww:textfield ... />
> > ...
> >
> > The only difference is that instead of the TextFieldTag issueing an
> > rd.include() request to some unknown URL (JSP or velocity), it uses
Velocity
> > to write -directly- to the JspWriter:
> >
> > template.merge(context, pageContext.getOut());
> >
> > All the same support would exist (themes, tweaking, etc), but it would
just
> > be much faster. The downside is that if you have custom UI widgets,
you'll
> > have to convert them to velocity.
> >
> > Thoughts? Actually, don't write back to this. Instead, just show up to
the
> > dev meeting tomorrow.
> >
> > -Pat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
> > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
> > http://www.vasoftware.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> --
> Peter Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Moveit Pty Ltd
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
> SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
> http://www.vasoftware.com
> _______________________________________________
> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork

Reply via email to