Thanks for the update--just a few comments from my perspective. I'm a relative newbie on Mach-II but I've used it on two semi-large projects now and your statement that Mach-II "yields no noticeable advantage" is a little off-base in my opinion. *Any* framework is going to create longer development times compared to the usual "display page/action page" scenario, and blazing-fast code can be written if you aren't using a framework at all, but I think perhaps your discussion is a little one-sided since it focuses largely on--at this point at any rate--page execution times.

The true benefit of using a framework comes in code flexibility and maintenance, not in page execution times and initial development times. Spaghetti code can be fast to write and may be very fast to execute, but maintenance is a nightmare. The "busy work" (as you call it) associated with Mach-II has a huge benefit in my mind, namely that when requirements change, or modifications need to be made in the future, they can be done with very little impact on the existing code.

This is where Mach-II outshines the other frameworks I've tried IMO, because if something changes, you just change the details of the event related to that item, maybe write a new method or two, and you're done. Very rarely do you have to trudge through hundreds of lines of code worrying about all sorts of dependencies between pages and components. Everything is extremely cohesive and very loosely coupled, and I've found that on the projects I've used this on, I'm far less frustrated with changes and can make them far more quickly and easily than I have been able to in the past. That's a huge benefit, and also allows for a greater ROI on the application in general, because with this extremely flexibility new functionality can be added and old functionality can be modified quickly and easily. This means if it's done right very rarely will an application be thrown out simply because it's easier to start over than it is to modify the existing code base.

I don't disagree that performance is important, I'm just pointing out that there's a LOT more to building a successful application than just page execution time and initial development time. In my mind there has to be a balance between what the developers have to do to build and maintain the application and the speed with which users can access the application. In the two applications I've done with Mach-II, even the most complex pages come in at under 1000 ms under a decent user load, and most pages load in 300-400 ms. That's extremely acceptable in my mind. Lowering that page load time at the cost of abandoning something that makes my life as a developer SO much easier and thereby saves my company money just isn't a good tradeoff IMO. If faster performance is absolutely necessary, hardware is cheap--development time typically isn't.

I guess my main point is that we of course always have to be mindful of the choices we make and how they impact performance, but the choices we make have a far wider impact than just performance. If we develop something extremely quickly that has astoundingly fast performance but we do so at the cost of code flexibility, then we're doing everyone involved--both users and the people paying for the development--a pretty big disservice.

Matt

-------------------------
Matthew P. Woodward
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: CaptainJavac
http://www.mattwoodward.com




----Original Message Follows---- From: S.Isaac Dealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Breaking the Sound Barrier? Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:52:37 -0600

It's that time again, time for the 2nd installment of framework
comparison statistics. Both my previous article with comparisons of
Fusebox 3 and the onTap framework, and my latest article with
additional information about Mach-II can be found here:

http://www.turnkey.to/ontap/docs/index.cfm?netaction=articles

Assuming of course that I don't put you all to sleep. ;)

s. isaac dealey 214-823-9345

team macromedia volunteer http://www.macromedia.com/go/team

chief architect, tapestry cms http://products.turnkey.to

onTap is open source http://www.turnkey.to/ontap


----------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: Send UNSUBSCRIBE to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org

_________________________________________________________________
Cell phone �switch� rules are taking effect � find out more here. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx


-----------------------------------------------
To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: Send UNSUBSCRIBE to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org




Reply via email to