tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Harish Krishnaswamy <hkrishnasw...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Why so many synthetic properties?
Date Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:37:47 GMT
I certainly agree with you on debugging, I have had problems with this myself. I can't comment
on 
performance 'cuase I have not used any verision prior to 3.0. I can go either way but would
prefer 
to keep the code concise if possible.

-Harish

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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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