tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Colin Sampaleanu <colin...@exis.com>
Subject Re: Why so many synthetic properties?
Date Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:29:02 GMT
In my experience with the Eclipse 3.0 stream and JDK 1.4, Eclipse 
complains about not having source about the enhanced classes (requiring 
a confirm on the dialog on my part), but it does hit the breakpoints 
properly...

Richard Lewis-Shell wrote:

>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


Mime
View raw message