Comments for JT Dev http://www.jtict.com/blog About programming stuff Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:22:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Green http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-33765 Green Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:22:22 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-33765 Sorry, forgot to mention the pull request is here: https://github.com/jtdev/blogpost_files/pull/10 Sorry, forgot to mention the pull request is here: https://github.com/jtdev/blogpost_files/pull/10

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Green http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-33764 Green Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:21:25 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-33764 Hello, I've just added a playapp + rythm template engine into your testing set. Rythm provides basically the the same level of performance with Japid (on my machine for 1000 product and 20 concurrent requests, the mean time of rythm is around 61ms, and Japid around 55ms) but much more easier to integrate with Play. The motivation for me to design this yet another static template engine is to create a Razor like syntax, fast, and easy to use tool. Migration from groovy to rythm is simple: 1. rewrite your view file using rythm syntax (it's very easy, trust me) 2. annotate with your corresponding controller method with @UseRythmTemplateEngine when the view is changed to rythm. And that's all. No need for play rythm:gen, and no need to rewrite your controller and make it extends RythmController. You can even reuse your FastTags in your application path without any expense. Check the source code and you will find how it works. Hello, I’ve just added a playapp + rythm template engine into your testing set. Rythm provides basically the the same level of performance with Japid (on my machine for 1000 product and 20 concurrent requests, the mean time of rythm is around 61ms, and Japid around 55ms) but much more easier to integrate with Play. The motivation for me to design this yet another static template engine is to create a Razor like syntax, fast, and easy to use tool. Migration from groovy to rythm is simple:

1. rewrite your view file using rythm syntax (it’s very easy, trust me)
2. annotate with your corresponding controller method with @UseRythmTemplateEngine when the view is changed to rythm.

And that’s all. No need for play rythm:gen, and no need to rewrite your controller and make it extends RythmController. You can even reuse your FastTags in your application path without any expense.

Check the source code and you will find how it works.

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Makoto http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-33004 Makoto Wed, 01 Feb 2012 06:14:44 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-33004 I've found your benchmarks to be useful, however, I have also tried running these in Linux as opposed to Windows and have found that they run significantly faster in Linux. One reason for this is that unlike IIS which is designed to run on the kernel, these other web servers cannot run on the kernel in Windows and can't get the best performance. I’ve found your benchmarks to be useful, however, I have also tried running these in Linux as opposed to Windows and have found that they run significantly faster in Linux. One reason for this is that unlike IIS which is designed to run on the kernel, these other web servers cannot run on the kernel in Windows and can’t get the best performance.

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Makoto http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-32923 Makoto Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:46:35 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-32923 Romain, The difference between Play on Java vs Play on Scala is simple, they use different template engines. The default templating in the Java version uses Groovy, whereas the Scala version uses it's own Scala based template engine that generates precompiled classes when building the site. The Scala version is more similar to the Japid template engine since Japid also generates code. Romain,

The difference between Play on Java vs Play on Scala is simple, they use different template engines.

The default templating in the Java version uses Groovy, whereas the Scala version uses it’s own Scala based template engine that generates precompiled classes when building the site. The Scala version is more similar to the Japid template engine since Japid also generates code.

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by ruslanasa http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-31541 ruslanasa Thu, 05 Jan 2012 22:37:26 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-31541 Seels Lift and Wicket apps have problems that should be solved: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Web-framework-performance-comparison-td3562647.html Seels Lift and Wicket apps have problems that should be solved: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Web-framework-performance-comparison-td3562647.html

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Romain http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-30922 Romain Thu, 29 Dec 2011 00:44:25 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-30922 How can you explain the huge performance difference between Play using Java an Play using Scala? How can you explain the huge performance difference between Play using Java an Play using Scala?

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Paulo Coutinho http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-29932 Paulo Coutinho Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:47:28 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-29932 Hi, Can you add the new grails version? (grails 2.0) Thanks. Hi,

Can you add the new grails version? (grails 2.0)

Thanks.

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by Vincent http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-28881 Vincent Sun, 27 Nov 2011 23:53:07 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-28881 Great benchmark, Thx. Since I like a lot Scala, Lift and Play! are the frameworks I am looking at and it's nice to have such a performance test to compare the two. Great benchmark, Thx.
Since I like a lot Scala, Lift and Play! are the frameworks I am looking at and it’s nice
to have such a performance test to compare the two.

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by glava http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-28003 glava Fri, 04 Nov 2011 13:07:19 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-28003 Its a freemarker:)) Its a freemarker:))

]]> Comment on Rails, Wicket, Grails, Play, Tapestry, Lift, JSP, Context by glava http://www.jtict.com/blog/rails-wicket-grails-play-lift-jsp/comment-page-2/#comment-28001 glava Fri, 04 Nov 2011 12:59:27 +0000 http://www.jtict.com/blog/?p=68#comment-28001 Awesome test, but I'm not sure what grails-fm is. Super happy about play results, cant wait 2 ;) Awesome test, but I’m not sure what grails-fm is.
Super happy about play results, cant wait 2 ;)

]]>