Is your problem with configuration rooted in the EJB2.0 madness? One of my biggest problems with Java is the actual deployment cycle to a web server. I always feel the business app lifecycle is not the supported well at the moment - a small change on the server (some text, rearrange a form, etc) seems to take to much work if the configuration is driven through annotations, etc. Or am I just missing the point?
Ruben On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > > A language based on: > > - Convension over configuration > - DSL friendlyness (to a certain degree) > - A hybrid type system (dynamic when you need, static when you can) > - Runtime interoperability > - Less is more > > For those reasons, I find Fan extremely interesting. > > /Casper > > On 29 Jun., 18:27, Viktor Klang <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Ruben Reusser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > hi there, > > > > > I always felt the compelling reason to switch from C/C++ to java was > that > > > there was a good set of libraries that came with java making my life > easier > > > to develop web application and break from the cgi scripts - Java had a > good > > > looking socket library that was easy to understand, nice file handling > and > > > an ok looking GUI library for little inhouse tools (compared to having > to > > > understand MFC and the windows UI programming model). Java was easier > than > > > C/C++ and it felt like developers would not have to be so smart to > actually > > > write good code - so overall it seemed to make good business sense to > bet > > > your next app on Java instead of C/C++. > > > > > If one wants to replace java today, what do you think it would take? Is > it > > > going to be enough to just have a nicer, easier language? Would one > need a > > > set of API's with the language that solve some big problems we have > today > > > (and what problem is there to solve)? Is it necessary to provide a good > IDE > > > for the language right from the start? > > > > > Would love to hear your comments. > > > > My personal belief: > > > > A language that is expressive enough to write code that makes advanced > > functionality easy to abstract into a nice, clean syntax for business > > developers. > > So as a library consumer I can focus on getting my business rules correct > > and as a library producer I can create complex solutions that are easy > for > > the consumer to consume. > > > > For me, this means: > > 1) Reducing line noise/boiler plate code > > 2) Strongly typed > > 3) Statically typed > > 4) Good tooling (IDE support et al) > > 5) A rich, open-source, library ecosystem > > > > > > > > > Ruben > > > > -- > > Viktor Klang > > Scala Loudmouth > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
