As a WO developer of many years and a recent Tapestry convert, I would appreciate it if you would itemise : - why WO doesn't work so well in a J2EE environment - why WO consumes more memory - what are the scalability problems?
If you could contrast that with how Tapestry does it better, that might help a few more folks from the WO world appreciate Tapestry and understand why certain decisions have been made the way they have. Best wishes Geoff On 05/07/05, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > WO takes a very different approach to maintaiing state on the server, > one that doesn't work so well in a J2EE env. and consumes much memory, > leading to scalability problems. > > I prefer Tapestry's approach. Further, MB's new If and For components > will make the whole process much more transparent. > > > On 7/5/05, Adam Czysciak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > At the beginning - hello everyone, I'm new here. And - starting with > > question. Probably it was already here many times, so please point me > > the URL to the archivized message so we don't spam the group:) > > > > My question is directed rather to Howard himself - why do we need > > rewinding in Tapestry? Well, I've read this part of "Tapestry in > > Action", so it's not "please explain me what it is". Just wondering - why? > > > > This causes so many Stale Exceptions. As for me, it conflicts with > > the idea of components design. A simple example - three components, one > > for displaying item, second for adding subitems, third for displaying > > subitems. Everything in one form, put one by one. What happens if I add > > new subitem? You know the answer. Well, I can easily solve it as > > everyone suggests everywhere, by performing actions in form submit, > > after it's all rewinded... But the huge problems appears if a Page has > > the form, and subcomponents are form elements (well, maybe it's such a > > special case?) and due to our components-design we want to split the > > actions. > > > > What is the most unclear to me - ... Howard mentions he was basing on > > WebObjects. I'm 2 years now using WebObjects, and there things simply > > work! Of course I don't blame Howard - he did a great job with Tapestry! > > But my question is - what caused the problems he couldn't jump over with > > such a basic fields? This Stale exceptions, using special Conditionals > > in Forms? I don't get it (yet)... > > > > -- > > Greets! > > Adam Czysciak > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sun Certified Programmer for the Java 2 Platform, SE 5.0 > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
