"worse" on what dimension? All of these frameworks have to be measured on several criteria:
- availability of support - strength of community - designer-friendliness of templates - maturity - stagnation - flexibility - performance - scalability - robustness - statefulness - programming language support - internationalisation - separation of concerns - verbosity/tendency towards boilerplate - presence of built-in patterns that fit your domain - interaction with client-side frameworks/technology - interaction with other server-side frameworks in your stack - is it a complete self-contained solution? - etc. Every single framework listed there is simultaneously both "best" and "worst". It all depends on context! is it suited for REST? for a client-facing app? On 17 February 2012 14:39, Fabrizio Giudici <[email protected]>wrote: > On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:26:00 +0100, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just spotted this on DZone. It might be relevant: >> http://css.dzone.com/articles/**comparing-web-frameworks-and<http://css.dzone.com/articles/comparing-web-frameworks-and> >> > > Interesting. Lift would be even worse than JSF, and Play not much better. > > > -- 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.
