tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hls...@comcast.net>
Subject RE: Why so many synthetic properties?
Date Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:14:57 GMT
The framework is doing more, much more, in Tapestry 3.0.  However, most of the additional costs
are
one-time costs, such as enhancing classes.

--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/sandbox/hivemind/
http://javatapestry.blogspot.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Lewis-Shell [mailto:rlewisshell@mac.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 4:25 PM
> To: Tapestry development
> Subject: Re: Why so many synthetic properties?
> 
> 
> My concerns so far are the extra performance hit, and the 
> obfuscation caused
> when debugging - not being able to put a breakpoint in
> AbstractFormComponent.setForm() was a real pain recently, and 
> in fact I
> ended up temporarily implementing the property just to get 
> around this.
> (could this just be my antiquated 1.3 JDK?  is 1.4 any better 
> at debugging
> these properties?  Eclipse/WSAD complained a lot about not 
> having source for
> these enhanced classes even when a breakpoint was in a superclass)
> 
> I don't have any performance metrics to back this up, but so 
> far our app
> under Tapestry 3.0b4 feels slower than it did under 2.2.  
> There are other
> things clouding this at the moment - the switch the commons-logging is
> causing problems (extra logging that wasn't present in our 
> app under 2.2),
> but there is certainly a lot of enhancing going on that wasn't before.
> 
> I really like the idea of enhanced classes - it's a great 
> piece of work.  I
> am just questioning its appropriateness for the framework components
> themselves.
> 
> R
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Harish Krishnaswamy" <hkrishnaswamy@comcast.net>
> To: "Tapestry development" <tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 10:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Why so many synthetic properties?
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > Richard Lewis-Shell wrote:
> >
> > > The question I asked earlier about why 
> AbstractFormComponent was changed
> to
> > > use a synthetic form property makes me wonder about this 
> in general -
> why
> > > does Tapestry 3 use so many synthetic properties?
> > >
> > > Is it just a matter of eating our own dog food? ie. 
> "because we can".
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the framework itself would be better off if it
> didn't
> > > require any runtime enhancing.
> >
> > Why do you think so? Is it performance? If so how much of a 
> performance
> impact is it? I think
> > managing bindings manually makes the code bloat and ugly.
> >
> >
> > Are there cases where the runtime enhancing
> > > provides some functional benefit and is actually _needed_?
> > >
> > > R
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message