2010-05-06

[11:40] <gmosx> hi

[11:45] <oberhamsi> goodjob ringostarr!

[11:54] <gmosx> is rhino really as inefficient as nathan claims? slower than interpreted Ruby ?!?

[12:05] <hannesw> gmosx: no way!

[12:05] <gmosx> it should be faster than plain ruby, even w/o invokedynamic, no?

[12:06] <hannesw> i don't know current performance of ruby, but helma used to outperform rails (also thanks to built in caching)

[12:07] <gmosx> ok...

[12:07] <gmosx> related to this...

[12:07] <gmosx> I understand it is possible to compile Javascript/Rhino code to .class files, no?

[12:07] <hannesw> yes, rhino does that in-memory by default

[12:07] <hannesw> you can also create .class files

[12:08] <hannesw> we don't do that because hot reloading gets hard to do that way

[12:08] <gmosx> OK, would it be possible to require() these class files?

[12:08] <hannesw> not directly. you can run the class files as top level js scripts

[12:09] <hannesw> or you can instantiate them, build a module, and have it require()d

[12:09] <gmosx> Theoretically, in production mode, would it be possible to require() class files (with disabled reloading)

[12:09] <hannesw> it's certainly possible to disable reloading

[12:09] <hannesw> you don't need class files for that

[12:09] <gmosx> no

[12:10] <gmosx> I mean, if we disable reloading (that messes up with .class files as you said) would it be possible to require .class files?

[12:10] <gmosx> for example to deploy 'opaque' apps to a client (no source code for specific parts of the app)

[12:10] <hannesw> class files compiled from .js files? it's not implemented, no

[12:11] <hannesw> it could be done, i think

[12:11] <gmosx> but is theoretically possible with Rhino?

[12:11] <hannesw> yes

[12:11] <gmosx> good to know...

[12:11] <gmosx> it's an interesting option...

[12:13] <gmosx> bbl

[17:17] <earl> ok, pushed the non-include external skins stuff to my skins-include branch

[17:26] <robi42> earl, works fine with ringolog, btw

[17:40] <earl> robi42: thanks for testing