[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       velocity-user
Subject:    Re: Relative Performance
From:       Simon Christian <simon () stoutstick ! com>
Date:       2003-04-23 12:29:33
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Terry,

I did some simple (time only) tests a while back to try and ascertain 
what the relative performance was of those three methods. I'm afraid I 
don't have the figures to hand, but from memory there wasn't a great 
deal in it until the number of iterations was high in the 000's. At that 
point, as one might expect the order you've given was the order of most 
to least performant.

- simon

Terry Steichen wrote:
> I have a template containing repetitive loop in which each iteration requires a \
> bunch of steps.  It would be easier to read and manage if the actual processing \
> steps were invoked via a macro, or via a parse directive invoking them in another \
> template. 
> In general, is there is any significant performance differences between the three \
> approaches: inline, macro, parse-template (assuming full template caching)? 
> Regards,
> 
> Terry
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: velocity-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: velocity-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]