I've used play a bit, both 1.x and fledgeling 2.0 (currently at RC2) For both versions, tweakability is fantastic. Not just in CSS and HTML, but also in the underlying source files.
v1.x can sometimes be a bit slow for changes to Scala source, but works fantastically well for groovy and Java (the core template framework was groovy-native). V2.0 is Scala native and works quickly across the board, using the dependency tracking from sbt to optimise rebuild times. So a very good score on points 2,3,5 and 7 It's very restful and intuitive, the routing config is a joy to use (points 1 & 6): http://www.playframework.org/documentation/1.2.4/routes It's extensible, with a wide range of modules available (point 9): http://www.playframework.org/modules It's also very fast (point 3), with the slowest bit being the groovy-based templating in 1.x. Scala's static typing in 2.x is a much better fit for the JVM, so there's no reason to expect it would run slower than any other JVM-based framework. My only critique is that I prefer scalate's jade templating language over play's own templates. But there's a module available for that, so it's really not a very big complaint :) On 17 February 2012 16:39, phil swenson <[email protected]> wrote: > The grid doesn't seem useful to me. Maybe if I heard the presentation > I'd see the value. > > You have to make some value judgements. > > To me the values are off the top of my head (with no weighting or > order, and probably incomplete): > 1) restful URLs > 2) ease of development/productivity > 3) performance > 4) active community > 5) ability for designers to "tweak" (easy CSS/HTML tweaks w/o having > to build/restart) > 6) intuitiveness > 7) ease of testing > 8) weight (is it huge, does it take forever to start?) > 9) extensibility > > Rails wins on all this except performance, but it's ruby which is a > non-starter for most Java shops > From what I see Play is the best Java alternative. It has much of the > rails philosophy, ease but it's in Java. > > I also say this without developing a major app in Play. I'd like to > hear other's thoughts on this who have used Play extensively. > > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Fabrizio Giudici > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 16:34:14 +0100, Kevin Wright < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> "worse" on what dimension? > > > > > > Don't ask me, of course, ask the presentation author :-) I see a diagram > > where frameworks are ordered by a certain score, which if I understand > well > > is created by summing intermediate values. It's not clear to me who gave > > those values. > > > > > -- 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.
