On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 23:09 US/Pacific, Adam Churvis wrote:
> the two main things that got me about CFIMPORT was that
> you couldnt use a variable to target the custom tag library location
> since
> its a compile-time directive
Correct. You can use a mapping however and that can be contro
Sean,
Thanks for discussing this topic with me and with the rest of the list. The
reason why this is so important to me is because we have something big that
were about to launch that makes extensive use of a fairly large custom tag
library, and weve looked at how to handle them from many diffe
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 18:42 US/Pacific, Adam Churvis wrote:
> I'd like to get your opinion on something else, if I may. If a system
> makes
> extensive use of a good-sized library of custom tags throughout an
> application (virtually on every page), and the logic and display tasks
> handled
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 19:46 US/Pacific, Adam Churvis wrote:
> First, CFIMPORT is running only once, but the x:tag is being called
> 100,000
> times. In the real world, CFIMPORT would be called on every page
> using a
> custom tag.
Correct. But is a *compiler* directive and doesn't really
oRCAT from
http://www.ProductivityEnhancement.com
The ColdFusion MX Bible is in bookstores now!
- Original Message -
From: "Sean A Corfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: S
--
From: "Sean A Corfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: So... cfmodule is slow...?
> On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 09:21 US/Pacific, Adam Churvis wrote:
> > My point of conten
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 16:24 US/Pacific, Sean A Corfield wrote:
> "slow" in comparison to, say, CFC method invocation.
So I went back and did some linear timings... yeah, I know they don't
tell you 'real world' performance but it was interesting nonetheless:
I ran these three tests in a lon
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 09:21 US/Pacific, Adam Churvis wrote:
> My point of contention was whether or not Sean thought that CFMODULE
> on CFMX
> 6.1 using template="" syntax was "slow" because we use custom tags
> quite a
> bit here.
"slow" in comparison to, say, CFC method invocation.
You
The 'search' for the tag, though, is done once. That's why if you move a custom tag
after it has been called once, you need to restart MX for it to 'look' for it again.
That being said - I prefer cfmodule w/ template so I can specify exactly where MX
should run the tag - this is extremely impor
ning.com
Download CommerceBlocks V2.1 and LoRCAT from
http://www.ProductivityEnhancement.com
The ColdFusion MX Bible is in bookstores now!
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject:
sage-
> From: Adam Churvis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:47 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: So... cfmodule is slow...?
>
> With all due respect, I beg to differ. In CFMX 6.1, CFMODULE is not
slow
> at
> all when you're using th
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 5:10 AM
Subject: So... cfmodule is slow...?
> http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/coding_standards/performance
"Calvin Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/coding_standards/performance.html
>
> But is it slower than cf_ ?
>
Efficiency stems more from good design than from good coding.
Robert L. Glass
More computing sins are committed in the
http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/coding_standards/performance.html
But is it slower than cf_ ?
- Calvin
~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=i:4:137648
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t
14 matches
Mail list logo
