gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <>
Subject [RT] Generator vs Serializer
Date Sun, 28 Mar 2004 16:19:50 GMT
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
 > We have gump.document.text, and we could create gump.document.html
 > that use cheetah to write it.

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> +1 in removal of forrest and go plain XHTML + CSS. But please, let's use 
> a velocity-like approach, not a DOM like approach!

I may be reading too much into Stefano's words, but if so, the following 
is how I see things.

At the moment, gump.document.* take a complete set of knowledge and 
produce a set of artifacts.  The best analogy to Cocoon for this would 
be a serializer which terminates a pipeline.

An alternate approach would be to completely flip this.  Have the 
equivalent logic drive the acquisition of certain pieces of information, 
which can be processed as it is being received.  The best analogy to 
Cocoon for this would be a generator which is at the beginning of a 
pipeline.  Classic gump is closer to this model... after a brief 
generation phase, the execution of the resulting script triggers 
actions, the output of which is intermixed with some static and some 
generated output.

I'm not much into abstract architectural discussion.  I tend to focus on 
tangible and measurable quanties that matter to real people.  In this 
case, it is clear that Gump is expected to run for a long period of 
time, and I view not having ANY output until EVERYTHING is done as 
something less than ideal.

Producing output as the information becomes available can also 
dramatically reduce working set sizes.

- Sam Ruby

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message