tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hans Bergsten <>
Subject Re: [Jasper2] framework for tag optimization
Date Sat, 23 Nov 2002 18:53:48 GMT
Peter Romianowski wrote:
>>If you think using it for JSTL is okay, why wouldn't it be 
>>okay for other tag libraries? The same issues (if they are 
>>issues) apply to JSTL, don't they?
>   I thought of it beeing done by the jasper-crew, i.e. being
> part of "stock tomcat", so it could be assured that it is
> working correct.

Well, I hope that it the plugin API would be easy enough to use
to ensure that others than the "jasper crew" can get it right for
other tig libraries ;-)

>   The way I understand the proposal is that it *could* be some kind of
> a replacement for a tag-library. So for conformity and interoperability
> a programmer would have to implement the plugin *AND* the taghandler.
> (And I extremely doubt that many will). 

I may be wrong, but I don't think the proposal is a replacement. For
instance, the config file makes a reference to the tag handler class
(the <tag-class> element).

>  I was involved in a discussion about a "precompile all JSPs in a 
> webapp"-functionality (which was wanted by *many* users). I was 
> willing to contribute to it, but the developers (Craig himself, 
> I think :) said that such a thing would not belong to a reference i
> mplementation of a servlet-container. After he told me so, I agreed 
> with him, although I still would like to have  this feature. :) So 
> that was the reason why I posted my comments.

This was before I rejoined this list, so I can't comment on that
specific proposal (yes, I _could_ look for it in the archives, but
I wont ;-) In general, though, I don't see anything wrong with adding
non-standard features to Tomcat, as long as they are clearly optional
and the behavior defined by the spec still works. In fact, there was
a discussion about this in the Jakarta PMC when Jakarta was formed.
The consensus at the time was that Tomcat has to be spec compliant
(it _is_ the RI, after all), but that there are no restrictions on
additional features.

>   As an application developer I would say: "YES! Give me that plugin-
> feature!" since it would improve performance drastically. So, I like
> the idea but I am not sure if such a thing would belong to "stock
> tomcat".

As long as a feature doesn't break spec conformance, it should be fine.
For this specific proposal (assuming my understanding of it is correct),
I don't see any problems.

Hans Bergsten                                <>
Gefion Software                       <>
Author of O'Reilly's "JavaServer Pages", covering JSP 1.2 and JSTL 1.0
Details at                                    <>

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

View raw message