On 11/19/05, Peter Farrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The distinguishing factor between M2 and MG for controller code is a name -- > controller (MG) or listener (M2). In essense, they act in the same way. > It's merely a semantic difference IMHO.
I beg to differ... The more important difference in my opinion is that Mach II uses a dynamic event queue whereas Model-Glue uses a static event queue. By that, I mean that in Mach II you can announceEvent(someVariable) and whatever event name is in someVariable will be added to the queue of events to be handled during the current request. Filters and plugins can modify the queue and change what events actually get handled. By contrast, Model-Glue has the control flow in the XML file, statically specified. Code can add a "result" to the event object but the XML determines what event gets fired for each result. That means that Mach II allows for completely dynamic execution order - you can't read the XML file and determine exactly what will be executed (and you can't always just read the code and determine what will be executed). Model-Glue is much more like Fusebox in that the entire execution path can be determined by reading the XML file. Sometimes you need the dynamic execution paths, and therefore Mach II, sometimes you don't (in which case you can choose either Mach II or Model-Glue). > In the terms of time, Mach-II is significantly older than MG -- years vs. > months. Mach II appeared in 2003. Model-Glue appeared in 2005. Mach II became usable in production with release 1.0.9 (it was not thread-safe before then) and has had two releases since (1.0.10 and 1.1.0). Model-Glue was thread-safe when it appeared and has been through a handful of releases. > Also, Macromedia's website is mostly run off Mach-II. Nope. There are about 50 web applications on macromedia.com. Mach II powers just about a quarter of them. > Team Mach-II does have the advantage the each release gets run through > Macromedia's QA Team (all the releases so far I think -- at least the recent > ones). True, each release has been tested for backward compatibility and some of the recent releases have been specifically load tested. However, since we're using macromedia.com as advertising for a framework, bear in mind that a key sales order management app was migrated from Mach II to Model-Glue to provide better maintainability of the configuration data... > I'm not sure about Arf!/Reactor type frameworks for large projects -- quick > prototypes maybe, but scalability worries me as well as their "new-ness". I agree. So does Joe Rinehart, creator of Arf! > I know that ColdSpring is relatively young in it's release schedule (0.5.0) > but from what I can tell the code is behind it appears really solid. Plus > the guys working on it are really brillant (Kudos to Dave and Chris)! Agreed. ColdSpring really ought to be considered a 1.0 release at this point but Dave and Chris (and Kurt) are too modest for that. -- Sean A Corfield -- http://corfield.org/ Got frameworks? "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:224741 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
