<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Progress on nsjsapi running jQuery under AOLserver</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/</link>
	<description>Everything that comes out of Dossy, from the strange to the banal.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:30:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Hamilton Chua</title>
		<link>http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/comment-page-1/#comment-841</link>
		<dc:creator>Hamilton Chua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Oct 2007 08:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dossy.org/archives/000538.html#comment-841</guid>
		<description>-- JavaScript is daunting? More so than, say, Tcl?

Hehe, I&#039;d say they&#039;re equally daunting :-)

I kinda envy the Java developers because they have GWT. They can do ajax with a syntax they are familiar with.

I think having something similar for TCL on AOLserver will add value to it.

I know we won&#039;t be winning over new users but it might make existing users who have invested time and effort to learning TCL on AOLserver happier.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8211; JavaScript is daunting? More so than, say, Tcl?</p>
<p>Hehe, I&#8217;d say they&#8217;re equally daunting <img src='http://dossy.org/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I kinda envy the Java developers because they have GWT. They can do ajax with a syntax they are familiar with.</p>
<p>I think having something similar for TCL on AOLserver will add value to it.</p>
<p>I know we won&#8217;t be winning over new users but it might make existing users who have invested time and effort to learning TCL on AOLserver happier.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dossy</title>
		<link>http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/comment-page-1/#comment-840</link>
		<dc:creator>Dossy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dossy.org/archives/000538.html#comment-840</guid>
		<description>Hamilton: Interesting--JavaScript is daunting?  More so than, say, Tcl?  As a web-based developer, at least a basic understanding of HTML and JavaScript are a minimum requirement regardless of whether you do front-end or back-end work.  The same can&#039;t be said for Tcl, or even PHP or ASP.NET or Java or anything else.

With respect to performance, I&#039;m not convinced that JavaScript is the most performant language, nor whether either SpiderMonkey or Rhino are the most efficient implementations, either.  As you point out, an application&#039;s performance (typically) has little to do with the technology stack.  Efficient application design (almost always) trumps the variations in performance between technologies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hamilton: Interesting&#8211;JavaScript is daunting?  More so than, say, Tcl?  As a web-based developer, at least a basic understanding of HTML and JavaScript are a minimum requirement regardless of whether you do front-end or back-end work.  The same can&#8217;t be said for Tcl, or even PHP or ASP.NET or Java or anything else.</p>
<p>With respect to performance, I&#8217;m not convinced that JavaScript is the most performant language, nor whether either SpiderMonkey or Rhino are the most efficient implementations, either.  As you point out, an application&#8217;s performance (typically) has little to do with the technology stack.  Efficient application design (almost always) trumps the variations in performance between technologies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hamilton Chua</title>
		<link>http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/comment-page-1/#comment-839</link>
		<dc:creator>Hamilton Chua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:35:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dossy.org/archives/000538.html#comment-839</guid>
		<description>Hi Dossy,

I have two reasons for being excited about nsjsapi and server side javascript :

1) To answer your question above. Javascript for many back-end developers is still daunting. A tcl api based on server side implementation of javascript like nsjsapi &quot;might&quot; make it less intimidating and easier to develop with frameworks like jQuery, ExtJS or Prototype specially among OpenACS developers. It may also make it relatively easier to write tests for javascript based web applications using tcl.

2) Performance.

As an example, I helped program a facebook application at Solutiongrove using a very nice javascript library called jsviz that generates force directed graphs. The app (http://apps.facebook.com/friendwebs/) generates force directed graphs of your friends in facebook.

One thing we noticed is that the performance of the generated graph highly depends on not only the browser you are using but also on the PC that you are using. The faster your pc, the better the performance.

Granted that we could probably speed things up by further tweaking the javascript code or rethinking the implementation, I would always wonder if performance for users who are using less powerful machines would improve if some of the calculations to generate the graph were performed on the server instead of on the web browser.

Good luck on your talk and more power.

Best,

Hamilton</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dossy,</p>
<p>I have two reasons for being excited about nsjsapi and server side javascript :</p>
<p>1) To answer your question above. Javascript for many back-end developers is still daunting. A tcl api based on server side implementation of javascript like nsjsapi &#8220;might&#8221; make it less intimidating and easier to develop with frameworks like jQuery, ExtJS or Prototype specially among OpenACS developers. It may also make it relatively easier to write tests for javascript based web applications using tcl.</p>
<p>2) Performance.</p>
<p>As an example, I helped program a facebook application at Solutiongrove using a very nice javascript library called jsviz that generates force directed graphs. The app (<a href="http://apps.facebook.com/friendwebs/" rel="nofollow">http://apps.facebook.com/friendwebs/</a>) generates force directed graphs of your friends in facebook.</p>
<p>One thing we noticed is that the performance of the generated graph highly depends on not only the browser you are using but also on the PC that you are using. The faster your pc, the better the performance.</p>
<p>Granted that we could probably speed things up by further tweaking the javascript code or rethinking the implementation, I would always wonder if performance for users who are using less powerful machines would improve if some of the calculations to generate the graph were performed on the server instead of on the web browser.</p>
<p>Good luck on your talk and more power.</p>
<p>Best,</p>
<p>Hamilton</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dossy</title>
		<link>http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/comment-page-1/#comment-838</link>
		<dc:creator>Dossy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dossy.org/archives/000538.html#comment-838</guid>
		<description>Hamilton: ExtJS is a fantastic JS UI library, but I&#039;m not sure what benefit there would be from executing it on the server side?  Could you explain what you were thinking of?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hamilton: ExtJS is a fantastic JS UI library, but I&#8217;m not sure what benefit there would be from executing it on the server side?  Could you explain what you were thinking of?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hamilton Chua</title>
		<link>http://dossy.org/2007/10/progress-on-nsjsapi-running-jquery-under-aolserver/comment-page-1/#comment-837</link>
		<dc:creator>Hamilton Chua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:01:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dossy.org/archives/000538.html#comment-837</guid>
		<description>OMG, Dossy, this is great, spectacular, wonderful !!!!
Please keep us posted about this in your blog.

I look forward to the day when I can write real server side tcl api to generate stuff like http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/examples with ExtJs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OMG, Dossy, this is great, spectacular, wonderful !!!!<br />
Please keep us posted about this in your blog.</p>
<p>I look forward to the day when I can write real server side tcl api to generate stuff like <a href="http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/examples" rel="nofollow">http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/examples</a> with ExtJs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.682 seconds -->
