Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
AnonymousGuy wrote: ..You do seem pretty intent on using GWT, no matter what advice is offered in this thread... I listen to advice from many different sources, and the advice in this thread ranks pretty low in its usefulness compared to the whole range of opinions that exist. Javascript libraries suck because the developer still needs to use the retarded java-crypt language which would be excutiating to develop any real application logic with. Productivity, development tools, debugging, componentization, reusability, rich libraries, high level algorithms and data structures, type safety, compile time optimizations are all huge advantages of Java compared to java-scrap-it ;-) http://www.ryandoherty.net/2007/04/29/why-google-web-toolkit-rots-your-brain/ On Feb 2, 11:50 pm, Dalius Dobravolskas dalius.dobravols...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Colin Flanagan quadvill...@yahoo.comwrote: Does anyone have that link? Looks like this one:http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-language-abstractions/ I must note that it is worth to read almost everything what is written by John Resig. -- Daliushttp://blog.sandbox.lt --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: Javascript libraries suck because the developer still needs to use the retarded java-crypt language which would be excutiating to develop any real application logic with. Productivity, development tools, debugging, componentization, reusability, rich libraries, high level algorithms and data structures, type safety, compile time optimizations are all huge advantages of Java compared to java-scrap-it ;-) You are expecting from java-script something what it was not intended for. It is moving to that direction now (FireBug, jQuery with big selection of plug-ins, MochiKit or other libraries, java-script unit-testing libraries). Compile Time Optimizations - haven't you heard anything about V8 or TraceMonkey? That's not exactly CTO but that's what you want... componetization - haven't you seen XUL and are you not using FireFox add-ons? It looks like either your knowledge should be refreshed a little bit or you are ignorant. BTW. You can use java applets. That's *exactly* what you need. -- Dalius http://blog.sandbox.lt --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
2009/2/3 Tycon adie...@gmail.com: AnonymousGuy wrote: ..You do seem pretty intent on using GWT, no matter what advice is offered in this thread... I listen to advice from many different sources, and the advice in this thread ranks pretty low in its usefulness compared to the whole range of opinions that exist. Javascript libraries suck because the developer still needs to use the retarded java-crypt language which would be excutiating to develop any real application logic with. Productivity, development tools, http://www.aptana.com/ debugging, http://getfirebug.com/ componentization, reusability, rich libraries, http://ajaxpatterns.org/Javascript_Multipurpose_Frameworks jQuery, EXTJs, Dojo, YUI, ... are made for these issues. high level algorithms and data structures, Even relational databases (don't use in your home) http://code.google.com/p/trimpath/wiki/TrimQuery type safety, like python? compile time optimizations are all huge advantages of Java like dojo does? http://wicketstuff.org/confluence/display/STUFFWIKI/Build+a+custom+dojo+to+fit+to+your+application (yes, use a javascript engine made with java like some minimizers) compared to java-scrap-it ;-) Maybe javascript its hard to learn, but you can do a lot of advanced things (like unit tests). I like javascript more than Java. More of the upper links are unusable for me, but are javascript posibilities. Excuse my poor english. I only mean that javascript isn't too bad ;-) regards, Javi http://www.ryandoherty.net/2007/04/29/why-google-web-toolkit-rots-your-brain/ On Feb 2, 11:50 pm, Dalius Dobravolskas dalius.dobravols...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Colin Flanagan quadvill...@yahoo.comwrote: Does anyone have that link? Looks like this one:http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-language-abstractions/ I must note that it is worth to read almost everything what is written by John Resig. -- Daliushttp://blog.sandbox.lt --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Feb 3, 2:48 am, Dalius Dobravolskas dalius.dobravols...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: Javascript libraries suck because the developer still needs to use the retarded java-crypt language which would be excutiating to develop any real application logic with. Productivity, development tools, debugging, componentization, reusability, rich libraries, high level algorithms and data structures, type safety, compile time optimizations are all huge advantages of Java compared to java-scrap-it ;-) You are expecting from java-script something what it was not intended for. It is moving to that direction now (FireBug, jQuery with big selection of plug-ins, MochiKit or other libraries, java-script unit-testing libraries). Compile Time Optimizations - haven't you heard anything about V8 or TraceMonkey? That's not exactly CTO but that's what you want... componetization - haven't you seen XUL and are you not using FireFox add-ons? It looks like either your knowledge should be refreshed a little bit or you are ignorant... ...or a troll. BTW. You can use java applets. That's *exactly* what you need. -- Daliushttp://blog.sandbox.lt --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Tycon wrote: sure but without client side code, it will have to reload a new page in response for each user interaction Rich Internet Applications rely on client side code to be as powerful as desktop app, and GWT facilitates that in a more comprehensive way than the simple javascript code snippets, or javascript libraries Did I miss something, but doesn't the GWT simply end up writing the appropriate html pages for you with the embeded javascript? If thats correct, which I think it is (although I may be over simplifying things) how is this more comprehensive then any of the other javascript libraries out there? Isn't the GWT just a different way of putting the code together? On Feb 1, 10:55 am, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Feb 1, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Tycon wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. which one of those is not supplied by facebook ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Feb 2, 9:51 am, Jose Galvez jj.gal...@gmail.com wrote: Tycon wrote: sure but without client side code, it will have to reload a new page in response for each user interaction Rich Internet Applications rely on client side code to be as powerful as desktop app, and GWT facilitates that in a more comprehensive way than the simple javascript code snippets, or javascript libraries Did I miss something, but doesn't the GWT simply end up writing the appropriate html pages for you with the embeded javascript? If thats correct, which I think it is (although I may be over simplifying things) It's that and another layer to wade through while debugging. Especially fun if you're not sure if the bug is in your code or the generated code. how is this more comprehensive then any of the other javascript libraries out there? Isn't the GWT just a different way of putting the code together? On Feb 1, 10:55 am, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Feb 1, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Tycon wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. which one of those is not supplied by facebook ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: sure but without client side code, it will have to reload a new page in response for each user interaction Says who? -- Raoul Snyman B.Tech Information Technology (Software Engineering) E-Mail: raoul.sny...@gmail.com Web: http://www.saturnlaboratories.co.za/ Blog: http://blog.saturnlaboratories.co.za/ Mobile: 082 550 3754 Registered Linux User #333298 (http://counter.li.org) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Wyatt Baldwin wyatt.lee.bald...@gmail.comwrote: On Feb 2, 9:51 am, Jose Galvez jj.gal...@gmail.com wrote: Tycon wrote: sure but without client side code, it will have to reload a new page in response for each user interaction Rich Internet Applications rely on client side code to be as powerful as desktop app, and GWT facilitates that in a more comprehensive way than the simple javascript code snippets, or javascript libraries Did I miss something, but doesn't the GWT simply end up writing the appropriate html pages for you with the embeded javascript? If thats correct, which I think it is (although I may be over simplifying things) It's that and another layer to wade through while debugging. Especially fun if you're not sure if the bug is in your code or the generated code. Wow, sounds too complicated, I think I'll stick with hacking JS for the moment how is this more comprehensive then any of the other javascript libraries out there? Isn't the GWT just a different way of putting the code together? On Feb 1, 10:55 am, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Feb 1, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Tycon wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. which one of those is not supplied by facebook ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
You do seem pretty intent on using GWT, no matter what advice is offered in this thread. It sounds as if you were looking more for confirmation of a decision already made. However, if you are still open to alternatives, I would suggest that you give a strong look at Yahoo's UI library (http:// developer.yahoo.com/yui/), which includes a lot of rich components, not just JavaScript language shortcuts or smaller building blocks (which it also includes). I have personally used YUI a lot and I feel that it is a mature, well designed library. Here's an example of a real software application, not just a picture slideshow: http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/layout/adv_layout_source.html You will need to code your server-side logic separately, but if anything goes wrong, performance is bad, or you need to extend the functionality, you will be dealing with code that you have written, not a mess of auto-generated, opaque gibberish. On Jan 31, 9:19 pm, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. I'm not creating web sites for popularity contests, but using the web as a platform for real software applications that provide an actual (business) service. For that it's much better to use more client side (e.g. javascript) code to make it seem like a real desktop app. If you just want to create some flicker slideshow derivative, then yes you can use php or whatever other server side application code. On Jan 31, 8:25 pm, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Jan 31, 2009, at 4:28 PM, Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? or you could just use jquery...ive no idea how you'd use only the client side portion of GWT. from what I could tell it seemed like the entire server-to-client is spit out from a single monolithic compilation and there was certainly no easy way to just use the client. Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). i think there are alternatives which would result in easier to read code. jquery can go a very long way. were written using GWT-like technology, and IMO google apps are the best example of smart efficient next generation web apps. theyre tremendously complex and reliant upon special build tools. facebook AFAIK is just php and is a more compelling client side experience than anything I've seen google do. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
sure but without client side code, it will have to reload a new page in response for each user interaction Rich Internet Applications rely on client side code to be as powerful as desktop app, and GWT facilitates that in a more comprehensive way than the simple javascript code snippets, or javascript libraries On Feb 1, 10:55 am, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Feb 1, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Tycon wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. which one of those is not supplied by facebook ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Hopefully we can end this discussion soon, but it may be worth noting that GWT was first concieved in an era where javascript libraries hadn't yet evolved to what they are today (especially with regard to jquery) and backend developers, especially Java ones, were extremely gun-shy at delving into the world of client-side scripting languages. A few months back, a similar discussion came up on this list about Pyamas and someone posted a link to John Resig's thoughts on javascript code generation. I can't find it off-hand , but his perspective definately resonated with me. Does anyone have that link? On Feb 2, 2009, at 6:01 PM, Mark T. mark.t...@gmail.com wrote: You do seem pretty intent on using GWT, no matter what advice is offered in this thread. It sounds as if you were looking more for confirmation of a decision already made. However, if you are still open to alternatives, I would suggest that you give a strong look at Yahoo's UI library (http:// developer.yahoo.com/yui/), which includes a lot of rich components, not just JavaScript language shortcuts or smaller building blocks (which it also includes). I have personally used YUI a lot and I feel that it is a mature, well designed library. Here's an example of a real software application, not just a picture slideshow: http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/layout/adv_layout_source.html You will need to code your server-side logic separately, but if anything goes wrong, performance is bad, or you need to extend the functionality, you will be dealing with code that you have written, not a mess of auto-generated, opaque gibberish. On Jan 31, 9:19 pm, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. I'm not creating web sites for popularity contests, but using the web as a platform for real software applications that provide an actual (business) service. For that it's much better to use more client side (e.g. javascript) code to make it seem like a real desktop app. If you just want to create some flicker slideshow derivative, then yes you can use php or whatever other server side application code. On Jan 31, 8:25 pm, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Jan 31, 2009, at 4:28 PM, Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? or you could just use jquery...ive no idea how you'd use only the client side portion of GWT. from what I could tell it seemed like the entire server-to-client is spit out from a single monolithic compilation and there was certainly no easy way to just use the client. Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). i think there are alternatives which would result in easier to read code. jquery can go a very long way. were written using GWT-like technology, and IMO google apps are the best example of smart efficient next generation web apps. theyre tremendously complex and reliant upon special build tools. facebook AFAIK is just php and is a more compelling client side experience than anything I've seen google do. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Colin Flanagan quadvill...@yahoo.comwrote: Does anyone have that link? Looks like this one: http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-language-abstractions/ I must note that it is worth to read almost everything what is written by John Resig. -- Dalius http://blog.sandbox.lt --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Tycon wrote: because it's not ready so it's just a toy at this point, just like pyjamas, while GWT is used by real production websites (ever heard of gmail) Oh, sorry, I forgot you were looking for something serious. The you should definitely consider this: http://brainfuck.progopedia.org/ I've heard from very credible sources that it is what is powering the next generation of Coogl products about to hit the market. Alberto --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Jan 31, 2009, at 9:19 PM, Tycon wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. I'm not creating web sites for popularity contests, but using the web as a platform for real software applications that provide an actual (business) service. For that it's much better to use more client side (e.g. javascript) code to make it seem like a real desktop app. If you just want to create some flicker slideshow derivative, then yes you can use php or whatever other server side application code. Is gmail a real web application? As others have mentioned, Google isn't using GWT for gmail, in fact, according to this article Google is NOT using GWT for *any* of its online AJAX applications: http://ajax.phpmagazine.net/2007/03/why_can_google_not_eat_its_dog.html The article is a bit old, so maybe they've started using it now, who knows, the fact is that they clearly were able to build a real web application with ZERO GWT. If you're trying to make website for real software apps, maybe you should consider why Google isn't using GWT itself? Cheers, Ben smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Jan 31, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Colin Flanagan wrote: I don't follow this logic. If the enterprise model, software development or otherwise (and does GWT really fit into that?), brought on the current economic disaster, what safeguards would the alternative (I guess in this instance, Pylons) have provided? The notion of enterprise java is an increasingly difficult word to define, almost as hard as the term art. Nevertheless, the very specific practices of financial institutions and their relation to regulatory bodies seems like a difficult simile to stylistic approaches to software development. yeah I don't make a great analogy pre-coffee. I was mostly thinking of indifference to wrongness cemented by institutions. It was widely suspected that Madoff was running a ponzi scheme. But everyone looked the other way, since people were making money - it would go against the institution to say something. Similarly, GWT produces really bloated and complex applications which all look really boring. But the framework was produced by the highest echcelons of the institution, and that alone is the only answer needed to the question of what to use. GWT is not even a great example, better examples would be Interwoven Teamsite, VBScript and Cold Fusion, selected due to their corporate roots - the notion that corporate- driven products are the better selection strictly due to their corporate roots. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Feb 1, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Tycon wrote: I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. which one of those is not supplied by facebook ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
;).. pretty good... . not atypical, I'm afraid. Nothing wrong with Java, per se.. but Sun tried to make it an 'industry' (and I suppose in some sense it is), but when you're trying to build an 'industry', you have to let a lot of people in who maybe shouldn't be there (like IBM, and Oracle).. and their job is to make things really complicated so people will continue to pay them for ever more useless shit, year after year. On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Michael Bayer zzz...@gmail.com wrote: I worked briefly with a project that used GWT (we of course ultimately rewrote the whole thing in pylons) for some portions of a web based administration tool. The components were incredibly simple table controls displaying database data. There were two dozen GWT-derived source files used to generate about four different data views that all looked nearly alike, multiple compilers and two separate build.xml files existed to compile the full application (gwt has its own compiler separate from javac), and there were skeletons, stubs and all kinds of translation/glue code all over the place. On the view side there was nothing about these components that you wouldn't have seen from a perl CGI script 10 years ago - they were just flat tables of data, no interactivity beyond previous page/next page. The usage of GWT was obviously selected out of a vague sense of doing things the 'right' way without the benefit of actual experience in doing things at all. These small table controls took more than a full second to render just 20 or 30 rows of data, and I assumed that the underlying SQL and database was the reason. Not so at all. Removing the usage of GWT and replacing with a simple ajax call to a struts action which rendered inline HTML directly from a jsp page, with all other factors remaining in place including the same database code and database (remember we're still in java), the components rendered about 50 times faster. The size of the code base shrunk by about 24 source files, one less build.xml file, and several hundred class files (their build process was multiplying the full set of GWT classes in multiple locations for some reason, which I suspect was not a GWT-specific issue). To see why a straight ajax call to a JSP page to a struts action to some hibernate code might be 50x faster than a GWT interface to a GWT- enabled servlet to the same hibernate code, the next time you build a small GWT application, use firebug to look at the XMLHttpRequest calls being sent over the wire. The messages are more bloated than Google's stock price two years ago and more inscrutable than Peter Norvig's PHD dissertation. Remember, the enterprise way of thinking is what's brought us the economic disaster, vast ponzi schemes where everyone looks the other way, etc. I.e. seems to work for now so fuck it. On Jan 30, 4:04 am, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: I heard that many enterprise web applications use tomcat (and Google Web Toolkit to create the client side javascript code). What are the advantages of using a framework like Pylons (or Django, Rails, etc) compared to using Java framworks ? Why can't the Java framwork be used for non-enterpise web site apps ? Java has a performance advantage over Python (and Ruby), but I guess the down side is that it's not as agile for rapid development ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Thanks. I have probably been lucky to not have had the opportunity of having GWT inflicted on any of my projects, but your appreciation of GWT resonates very true -- and with many projects java... the problem probably is that google was constrained to hire too quickly, so after having creamed the python pool they had to succumb to hiring too many java developers ;-!! Anyway, I've always been very wary of any platform where its proponents tend to describe things via tool-based procedures e.g. select menu x in eclipse, then click y (hence my reference to over in another thread to keep those eclipsed guys out of pylons if you want pylons to retain its design integrity). But GWT is RIA territory, and so not specifically pylons territory. It should be compared to what best RIA options would be for use with pylons? Or, maybe even more specifically, how would other client code generator types of toolkits compare -- two that come to mind are pyjamas (from python) and cappuccino (from objective-c) ? On Jan 31, 2009, at 6:44 PM, Michael Bayer wrote: I worked briefly with a project that used GWT (we of course ultimately rewrote the whole thing in pylons) for some portions of a web based administration tool. The components were incredibly simple table controls displaying database data. There were two dozen GWT-derived source files used to generate about four different data views that all looked nearly alike, multiple compilers and two separate build.xml files existed to compile the full application (gwt has its own compiler separate from javac), and there were skeletons, stubs and all kinds of translation/glue code all over the place. On the view side there was nothing about these components that you wouldn't have seen from a perl CGI script 10 years ago - they were just flat tables of data, no interactivity beyond previous page/next page. The usage of GWT was obviously selected out of a vague sense of doing things the 'right' way without the benefit of actual experience in doing things at all. These small table controls took more than a full second to render just 20 or 30 rows of data, and I assumed that the underlying SQL and database was the reason. Not so at all. Removing the usage of GWT and replacing with a simple ajax call to a struts action which rendered inline HTML directly from a jsp page, with all other factors remaining in place including the same database code and database (remember we're still in java), the components rendered about 50 times faster. The size of the code base shrunk by about 24 source files, one less build.xml file, and several hundred class files (their build process was multiplying the full set of GWT classes in multiple locations for some reason, which I suspect was not a GWT-specific issue). To see why a straight ajax call to a JSP page to a struts action to some hibernate code might be 50x faster than a GWT interface to a GWT- enabled servlet to the same hibernate code, the next time you build a small GWT application, use firebug to look at the XMLHttpRequest calls being sent over the wire. The messages are more bloated than Google's stock price two years ago and more inscrutable than Peter Norvig's PHD dissertation. Remember, the enterprise way of thinking is what's brought us the economic disaster, vast ponzi schemes where everyone looks the other way, etc. I.e. seems to work for now so fuck it. On Jan 30, 4:04 am, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: I heard that many enterprise web applications use tomcat (and Google Web Toolkit to create the client side javascript code). What are the advantages of using a framework like Pylons (or Django, Rails, etc) compared to using Java framworks ? Why can't the Java framwork be used for non-enterpise web site apps ? Java has a performance advantage over Python (and Ruby), but I guess the down side is that it's not as agile for rapid development ? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Michael Bayer wrote: (we of course ultimately rewrote the whole thing in pylons) This. same database code and database (remember we're still in java), the components rendered about 50 times faster. And this. What have you gained from Pylons? Development speed or performance as well? Regards, Dalius --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). you are way off here - it is quite doable to create a nice GUI with Rails (or Pylons or Werkzeug or ...) and use Prototype or add in some jQuery (or your js framework of choice) for fast client side actions. Just look at some of the 37 Signals apps - but if you want to use GWT that's fine, your choice. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
The point of GWT is that you can use java for the client side code, with most of its core libraries, and you get better optimized javascript, and much better development environment and tools (IDE, debugger). This is superior compared to using any javascript framework, none of which offers the comprehensive high level libraries that java provides. On Jan 31, 2:20 pm, MilesTogoe miles.to...@gmail.com wrote: Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). you are way off here - it is quite doable to create a nice GUI with Rails (or Pylons or Werkzeug or ...) and use Prototype or add in some jQuery (or your js framework of choice) for fast client side actions. Just look at some of the 37 Signals apps - but if you want to use GWT that's fine, your choice. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 8:55 AM, jerry jerryji1...@gmail.com wrote: the enterprise way of thinking is what's brought us the economic disaster, vast ponzi schemes where everyone looks the other way, etc. I.e. seems to work for now so fuck it. Bravo, Bravo, and BRAVO! This is so brilliant that it got to go in the Zen of Pylons. I agree. Fraud isn't just endemic in Wall Street, it also exists in Software Engineering, and especially in buzz technologies. One of the dead give aways, is when someone says, Trust me, I am smarter than you, and you just don't understand.., that is a huge red flag for any new technology. Jerry On Jan 31, 12:44 pm, Michael Bayer zzz...@gmail.com wrote: I worked briefly with a project that used GWT (we of course ultimately rewrote the whole thing in pylons) for some portions of a web based administration tool. The components were incredibly simple table controls displaying database data. There were two dozen GWT-derived source files used to generate about four different data views that all looked nearly alike, multiple compilers and two separate build.xml files existed to compile the full application (gwt has its own compiler separate from javac), and there were skeletons, stubs and all kinds of translation/glue code all over the place. On the view side there was nothing about these components that you wouldn't have seen from a perl CGI script 10 years ago - they were just flat tables of data, no interactivity beyond previous page/next page. The usage of GWT was obviously selected out of a vague sense of doing things the 'right' way without the benefit of actual experience in doing things at all. These small table controls took more than a full second to render just 20 or 30 rows of data, and I assumed that the underlying SQL and database was the reason. Not so at all. Removing the usage of GWT and replacing with a simple ajax call to a struts action which rendered inline HTML directly from a jsp page, with all other factors remaining in place including the same database code and database (remember we're still in java), the components rendered about 50 times faster. The size of the code base shrunk by about 24 source files, one less build.xml file, and several hundred class files (their build process was multiplying the full set of GWT classes in multiple locations for some reason, which I suspect was not a GWT-specific issue). To see why a straight ajax call to a JSP page to a struts action to some hibernate code might be 50x faster than a GWT interface to a GWT- enabled servlet to the same hibernate code, the next time you build a small GWT application, use firebug to look at the XMLHttpRequest calls being sent over the wire. The messages are more bloated than Google's stock price two years ago and more inscrutable than Peter Norvig's PHD dissertation. Remember, the enterprise way of thinking is what's brought us the economic disaster, vast ponzi schemes where everyone looks the other way, etc. I.e. seems to work for now so fuck it. On Jan 30, 4:04 am, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: I heard that many enterprise web applications use tomcat (and Google Web Toolkit to create the client side javascript code). What are the advantages of using a framework like Pylons (or Django, Rails, etc) compared to using Java framworks ? Why can't the Java framwork be used for non-enterpise web site apps ? Java has a performance advantage over Python (and Ruby), but I guess the down side is that it's not as agile for rapid development ? -- Cheers, Noah --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
because it's not ready so it's just a toy at this point, just like pyjamas, while GWT is used by real production websites (ever heard of gmail) On Jan 31, 5:54 pm, Alberto Valverde albe...@toscat.net wrote: Tycon wrote: The point of GWT is that you can use java for the client side code, with most of its core libraries, and you get better optimized javascript, and much better development environment and tools (IDE, debugger). This is superior compared to using any javascript framework, none of which offers the comprehensive high level libraries that java provides. Why write Javascript in Java when you can do it in Ruby? Make sure you check out HotRuby:http://hotruby.yukoba.jp/ Alberto --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: because it's not ready so it's just a toy at this point, just like pyjamas, while GWT is used by real production websites (ever heard of gmail) Actually all I have heard is the opposite. In fact one of GWT's biggest but is that none of serious google products use it. In fact I'm almost certain gmail doesn't simply because gmail is older than the gwt project. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Jan 31, 2009, at 4:28 PM, Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? or you could just use jquery...ive no idea how you'd use only the client side portion of GWT. from what I could tell it seemed like the entire server-to-client is spit out from a single monolithic compilation and there was certainly no easy way to just use the client. Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). i think there are alternatives which would result in easier to read code. jquery can go a very long way. were written using GWT-like technology, and IMO google apps are the best example of smart efficient next generation web apps. theyre tremendously complex and reliant upon special build tools. facebook AFAIK is just php and is a more compelling client side experience than anything I've seen google do. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
If you are serious about perusing this path, please consider Seam/RichFaces before doing so. - Original Message From: Tycon adie...@gmail.com To: pylons-discuss pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 6:21:28 PM Subject: Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT The point of GWT is that you can use java for the client side code, with most of its core libraries, and you get better optimized javascript, and much better development environment and tools (IDE, debugger). This is superior compared to using any javascript framework, none of which offers the comprehensive high level libraries that java provides. On Jan 31, 2:20 pm, MilesTogoe miles.to...@gmail.com wrote: Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). you are way off here - it is quite doable to create a nice GUI with Rails (or Pylons or Werkzeug or ...) and use Prototype or add in some jQuery (or your js framework of choice) for fast client side actions. Just look at some of the 37 Signals apps - but if you want to use GWT that's fine, your choice. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
I'm not talking about facebook/youtube type sites, I'm talking about a real web application where users access information, enter information, search and analyze information, and visualize information. I'm not creating web sites for popularity contests, but using the web as a platform for real software applications that provide an actual (business) service. For that it's much better to use more client side (e.g. javascript) code to make it seem like a real desktop app. If you just want to create some flicker slideshow derivative, then yes you can use php or whatever other server side application code. On Jan 31, 8:25 pm, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com wrote: On Jan 31, 2009, at 4:28 PM, Tycon wrote: I'm planning on using GWT only for client side code and doing all server calls using JSON, and not using GWT's RPC mechanism. So I guess that would avoid the problem you are talking about ? or you could just use jquery...ive no idea how you'd use only the client side portion of GWT. from what I could tell it seemed like the entire server-to-client is spit out from a single monolithic compilation and there was certainly no easy way to just use the client. Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither Perl/CGI not Pylons/Rails etc CANNOT be used to create a gmail-like application, unless you resort to hand writing the entire UI (which runs wholly on the client) in javascript (good luck with that !). i think there are alternatives which would result in easier to read code. jquery can go a very long way. were written using GWT-like technology, and IMO google apps are the best example of smart efficient next generation web apps. theyre tremendously complex and reliant upon special build tools. facebook AFAIK is just php and is a more compelling client side experience than anything I've seen google do. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
My vote has to go to ThunderCats: Jaga on the backend with Cheetara for templating. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Tycon wrote: I heard that many enterprise web applications use tomcat (and Google Web Toolkit to create the client side javascript code). What are the advantages of using a framework like Pylons (or Django, Rails, etc) compared to using Java framworks ? Why can't the Java framwork be used for non-enterpise web site apps ? Java has a performance advantage over Python (and Ruby), but I guess the down side is that it's not as agile for rapid development ? definitely not as agile as Rails or even Django. likewise some of us prefer to program in Python or Ruby than in java or javascript. I think it's easier to deploy Rails, Django, Pylons with simple Apache and wsgi or passenger than have to delve into tomcat. and JQuery handles the javascript stuff well. my $.02 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
Is there a Rails-like framework for Java ? On Jan 30, 9:54 am, Jonathan Vanasco jvana...@gmail.com wrote: Java can take 10-20x longer to develop and manage than php / perl / python / etc. When you factor in rapid/agile frameworks like Pylons, Rails, Django, Catyalyst, Cake, etc the differences are even larger. You /can/ do whatever you want in Java; fun projects, startups, small businesses typically don't use it, because its too damn human- resources intensive. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
'grails'? On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a Rails-like framework for Java ? On Jan 30, 9:54 am, Jonathan Vanasco jvana...@gmail.com wrote: Java can take 10-20x longer to develop and manage than php / perl / python / etc. When you factor in rapid/agile frameworks like Pylons, Rails, Django, Catyalyst, Cake, etc the differences are even larger. You /can/ do whatever you want in Java; fun projects, startups, small businesses typically don't use it, because its too damn human- resources intensive. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
In my opinion Grails is new technology and isn't checked well. Of course I can be wrong. I am programming with Java. I use Hibernate, Spring and Facelets and to put it to work it takes a lot of time and a lot of xml written. 2009/1/30 chris mollis chris.mol...@gmail.com 'grails'? On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Tycon adie...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a Rails-like framework for Java ? On Jan 30, 9:54 am, Jonathan Vanasco jvana...@gmail.com wrote: Java can take 10-20x longer to develop and manage than php / perl / python / etc. When you factor in rapid/agile frameworks like Pylons, Rails, Django, Catyalyst, Cake, etc the differences are even larger. You /can/ do whatever you want in Java; fun projects, startups, small businesses typically don't use it, because its too damn human- resources intensive. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Pylons vs Tomcat+GWT
On Jan 30, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Tycon wrote: Is there a Rails-like framework for Java ? The Java Wicket framework is intended to provide rapid web development ala Rails, that might be the closest thing. If you just want to run on the JVM and are willing to take a performance hit from regular Java, you could use Rails via JRuby, or Grails via Groovy or even Django or Pylons via Jython (Pylons 0.9.7 has initial support for Jython 2.5). JRuby is slower than regular Java, but at this point is probably better for most things (particularly long running server side apps) than normal Ruby 1.8 (MRI). There's also Scala's Lift web framework. Scala should perform close to normal Java. Granted I'm talking about the performance of these language runtimes compared to Java -- the performance of the frameworks themselves may matter as well. -- Philip Jenvey --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups pylons-discuss group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
