cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Uli Mayring <u...@denic.de>
Subject Re: Turbine Connection Pool question
Date Fri, 21 Jul 2000 23:43:27 GMT
On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Donald Ball wrote:

> i'd check the xdocs/connection-pool.xml document that brian wrote.

Ah cool, there are docs!!!  (sorry, forgot all about xdocs, because I'm
usually just using the HTML docs)

> > Plus, does the connection pool work with the SQL processor or only with
> > the SQL taglib?
> 
> only with taglib. i consider processor to be deprecated.

I know you do :)

I believe that the code of the taglib is probably much easier to maintain
and more cleanly written. So, for you the taglib may be a source of
infinite joy and the processor a bottomless pit and rather smelly.

But from a user's point of view it is different. The processor is more
elegant to use. It is much more fun to write things for the processor. It
doesn't make you write a 500-character SQL statement on one line. It 
doesn't force you to use XSP. Processor pages are less verbose and easier
to read. It is much easier to debug pages that use the processor.

So, is it entirely impossible to make the processor and the taglib use a
common codebase? After all, the taglib is just an extra layer, because the
taglib-generated code gets processed by the XSP processor.

I would be willing to maintain the processor, if I can get the hang of how
it works. Frankly, I have no idea about its internals and don't even know
which source files belong to it. But I would give it a try, if there was a
way to make processor and taglib use a common codebase. If that were not
possible, then I think maintaining the processor would not really be worth
it, because I seem to be only one in love with it :)

So, what does the creator of processor and taglib say?

Ulrich

-- 
Ulrich Mayring
DENIC eG, Softwareentwicklung


Mime
View raw message