Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-tomcat-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 59089 invoked from network); 28 May 2005 21:49:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 28 May 2005 21:49:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 79634 invoked by uid 500); 28 May 2005 21:49:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-tomcat-user-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 79616 invoked by uid 500); 28 May 2005 21:49:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Tomcat Users List" Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 79602 invoked by uid 99); 28 May 2005 21:49:12 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: unknown (hermes.apache.org: error in processing during lookup of burton@rojo.com) Received: from zrnetservice.com (HELO wifi.zrnetservice.com) (209.133.52.163) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 May 2005 14:49:10 -0700 Received: from adsl-67-114-20-29.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net ([67.114.20.29] helo=zrnet-Cole_Valley_Cafe.zrnetservice.com) by wifi.zrnetservice.com with asmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Dc9B6-0007Jw-00 for ; Sat, 28 May 2005 14:49:08 -0700 Received: from [10.100.1.252] (helo=[10.100.1.252]) by zrnet-Cole_Valley_Cafe.zrnetservice.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1Dc9B5-0000c4-NN for ; Sat, 28 May 2005 14:49:07 -0700 Message-ID: <4298E753.2070601@rojo.com> Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 14:49:07 -0700 From: Kevin Burton User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List Subject: Re: The amazingly slow performance of JSP (profiler results) References: <4297FB54.60804@rojo.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Dakota Jack wrote: >You have to be and are comparing apples and oranges, Kevin, > Perhaps... but my point was that JSP 2.0 doesn't HAVE to be this slow! :) >because >JSP *is* Java. DOH! It cannot run slower than what it is. > No.. it could run slower... I'm sure the Tomcat developers will find a way ;) >You >probably are comparing just running a Java method like setFoo(String >foo) { this.foo = foo; } where the parameter foo has the value "bar". >But, this is really misleading. The "simple" code you write with > in fact is just as complex as what you >see and have provided in your email. So, if you want to compare, you >have to do all that the code you see as *ugly* does. > No ... of course not! For example a JSP 1.x scriptlet would NOT be anywhere near as slow! >If you don't >want to do all that, don't. But, that is not a problem with JSP and >JSP is not a dog if used properly. > Ha... so what's properly? Don't use c:set? Don't use c:if ?... >That's all I have to say about >that. > > OK forest :) Kevin -- Use Rojo (RSS/Atom aggregator)! - visit http://rojo.com. See irc.freenode.net #rojo if you want to chat. Rojo is Hiring! - http://www.rojonetworks.com/JobsAtRojo.html Kevin A. Burton, Location - San Francisco, CA AIM/YIM - sfburtonator, Web - http://peerfear.org/ GPG fingerprint: 5FB2 F3E2 760E 70A8 6174 D393 E84D 8D04 99F1 4412 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org