Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
here is a movie where a NASA employee compares Ruby EJB, and a few other technologies: Sorry, just noticed this line giggled. Nick On Jun 25, 2006, at 5:57 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote: On Jun 24, 2006, at 10:02 PM, josh zeidner wrote: Why is it that every Ruby expert that I run into has absolutely nothing to show? I've never claimed to be a Ruby expert, and it'll be quite a while before I could claim even being close. I barely claim expertise in Java, and in that realm my expertise is not across the entire spectrum but rather focused on the web tier and 3rd party libraries and frameworks. I've had two applications online in RoR, one was a railsplayground.com hosted one that is currently down - it was my first RoR app. It scraped our local MLS site, looked up lat/long coordinates with geocoder.us and plotted homes on Google Maps. After seeing communitywalk, its not worth seeing, but it worked just fine and dandy and several realtors saw it and thought it would make a nice product. If I was passionate about that domain, I'd have pursued it, but I'd rather play with words in academia. My current project does have one incantation of the RoR front-end online, but Kowari often crashes (though my custom search server stays up and running no problem). I could point you to that incarnation, but its not fast enough to be impressive. The new system will be up in a week or so when our sysadmin/project manager gets back from vacation. And it is impressive, and looks gorgeous. I haven't put up, or shut up, yet, eh? Ha! :) but here is my word of advice to potential IT buyers: INVEST IN PEOPLE NOT TECHNOLOGY. No doubt. My job title is java programmer but my role is really to use whatever technologies are the best fit to get the job done. And RoR just happens to be that for the front-end currently. here is a movie where a NASA employee compares Ruby EJB, and a few other technologies: http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov rapid turn around, scripting languages are best for the UI, not compiled languages. I'm still watching, but its a good presentation so far. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On Jun 24, 2006, at 10:02 PM, josh zeidner wrote: Why is it that every Ruby expert that I run into has absolutely nothing to show? I've never claimed to be a Ruby expert, and it'll be quite a while before I could claim even being close. I barely claim expertise in Java, and in that realm my expertise is not across the entire spectrum but rather focused on the web tier and 3rd party libraries and frameworks. I've had two applications online in RoR, one was a railsplayground.com hosted one that is currently down - it was my first RoR app. It scraped our local MLS site, looked up lat/long coordinates with geocoder.us and plotted homes on Google Maps. After seeing communitywalk, its not worth seeing, but it worked just fine and dandy and several realtors saw it and thought it would make a nice product. If I was passionate about that domain, I'd have pursued it, but I'd rather play with words in academia. My current project does have one incantation of the RoR front-end online, but Kowari often crashes (though my custom search server stays up and running no problem). I could point you to that incarnation, but its not fast enough to be impressive. The new system will be up in a week or so when our sysadmin/project manager gets back from vacation. And it is impressive, and looks gorgeous. I haven't put up, or shut up, yet, eh? Ha! :) but here is my word of advice to potential IT buyers: INVEST IN PEOPLE NOT TECHNOLOGY. No doubt. My job title is java programmer but my role is really to use whatever technologies are the best fit to get the job done. And RoR just happens to be that for the front-end currently. here is a movie where a NASA employee compares Ruby EJB, and a few other technologies: http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov rapid turn around, scripting languages are best for the UI, not compiled languages. I'm still watching, but its a good presentation so far. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
btw- community walk is very similar to Ning. Have you ever seen Ning? jmz --- Chad Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/24/06, josh zeidner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it that every Ruby expert that I run into has absolutely nothing to show? I'm definitely not an expert, but I just showed you http://communitywalk.com in another post. http://zubio.com is another one we have done. There are a couple of others that are mostly complete, but not released publicly yet, as well as an internal agile project-management app. There's also this page: http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/RealWorldUsage -- Chad - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
And in OGNL it's similar to apply an _expression_ to any collection,
enumeration or iterator:
parent.children.{ #this.doSomething() }
or you can filter any collection, enumeration or iterator using
filteredItems = parent.children.{? name.startsWith("foo") }
This is what Buddha would have used for an _expression_ language.
- Drew
// OGNL since 1998
josh zeidner wrote:
Thomas,
I was about to say practically the same thing... in
python:
foreach( SomeObject )
It amazing! Its going save us billions in
development costs! Crom the Mighty, the patron diety
of Ruby on Rails is very pleased with block
enumerators.
Do they pass out pills at Ruby user group meetings?
-jmz
--- Thomas Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 09:44 AM 6/22/2006, Chad wrote:
Cool. I checked out the REXML page. This quote is
great:
"Some of the common differences are that the Ruby
API relies on block
enumerations, rather than iterators. For example,
the Java code:
for (Enumeration e=parent.getChildren();
e.hasMoreElements(); ) {
Element child = (Element)e.nextElement(); // Do
something with child
}
in Ruby becomes:
parent.each_child{ |child| # Do something with
child }
Can't you feel the peace and contentment in this
block of code? Ruby
is the language Buddha would have programmed in."
---
Dr. Ralph Griswold (creator or SNOBOL and Icon
programming languages)
used to say that there's really nothing new under
the sun in CS, it's all
recycled. I have to note that this statement form
you admire so much comes
directly from Smalltalk of 20 years ago!
regards,
-tom
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
+-+
Drew Davidson | OGNL Technology
+-+
| Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /
|Web: http://www.ognl.org /
|Vox: (520) 531-1966
|Fax: (520) 531-1965\
| Mobile: (520) 405-2967 \
+-+
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Just curious, what sites have you done using RoR? -jmz --- Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 22, 2006, at 12:44 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: Can't you feel the peace and contentment in this block of code? Ruby is the language Buddha would have programmed in. Yeah, being pragmatic, Buddha probably would be using RoR. The more idealistic of us would likely be doing Smalltalk. After reading several thousand blogs which argue the pros and cons of RoR and seeing it used in a real shop, I think the benefit does largely come down to the Ruby language itself. Bingo. Rails is only good *because* of Ruby. The dynamic magic that can be pulled to create very elegant looking DSLs (domain- specific languages) is the secret sauce that makes Rails what is. Sure, you can do wacky reflective stuff in Java and get close, but the natures of those languages are different at a core layer. Of course there's still big cons compared to Java - my main gripes are lack of a real refactoring, intelligent code-completing IDE Many gripe about this. Personally I have had great success being interactive and using IRB tab completion to explore and learn an API. In Rails, script/console is amazing - your entire Rails environment immediately accessible live. , and lack of something as nice as Maven to automatically manage your external and cross-project dependencies. RubyGems manages 3rd party library dependencies nicely, and with Rails you can freeze it to a particular project. There is also Capistrano (formerly Switchtower) for project automation such as testing and deployment. I'm not aware of much in the way of automated deployment tools in the Java world that compares to Capistrano. Its much trickier to generically deploy a Java application because of the various ways every application server deploys. Oh, and speaking of XML parsing performance - AJAX is now officially old news. AJAJ (Async Javascript And JSON, Javascript Serialized Object Notation) is the wave of the future. We don't need no stinking XML! Sending back XML was old news almost a decade ago. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
sarcasm
Its no where near the level of peace and contentment
that ruby offers. There's just something so darn cool
about Ruby I cant seem to put my finger on it. Maybe
its the cool graphics. Maybe its the videos and the
fact that ruby programmers use Macs. Maybe its that
it hasent showed up on India's radar just yet.
/sarcasm
--- Drew Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And in OGNL it's similar to apply an expression to
any collection,
enumeration or iterator:
parent.children.{ #this.doSomething() }
or you can filter any collection, enumeration or
iterator using
filteredItems = parent.children.{?
name.startsWith(foo) }
This is what Buddha would have used for an
expression language.
- Drew
// OGNL since 1998
josh zeidner wrote:
Thomas,
I was about to say practically the same thing...
in
python:
foreach( SomeObject )
It amazing! Its going save us billions in
development costs! Crom the Mighty, the patron
diety
of Ruby on Rails is very pleased with block
enumerators.
Do they pass out pills at Ruby user group
meetings?
-jmz
--- Thomas Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 09:44 AM 6/22/2006, Chad wrote:
Cool. I checked out the REXML page. This quote
is
great:
Some of the common differences are that the Ruby
API relies on block
enumerations, rather than iterators. For example,
the Java code:
for (Enumeration e=parent.getChildren();
e.hasMoreElements(); ) {
Element child = (Element)e.nextElement(); // Do
something with child
}
in Ruby becomes:
parent.each_child{ |child| # Do something with
child }
Can't you feel the peace and contentment in this
block of code? Ruby
is the language Buddha would have programmed in.
---
Dr. Ralph Griswold (creator or SNOBOL and Icon
programming languages)
used to say that there's really nothing new under
the sun in CS, it's all
recycled. I have to note that this statement form
you admire so much comes
directly from Smalltalk of 20 years ago!
regards,
-tom
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
+-+
Drew Davidson | OGNL Technology
+-+
| Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /
|Web: http://www.ognl.org /
|Vox: (520) 531-1966
|Fax: (520) 531-1965\
| Mobile: (520) 405-2967 \
+-+
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Hi Erik, After having worked with countless web frameworks and dozens of languages I will say this: What you gain in development effort and 'syntactic sugar' you lose in performance. As all these sites prop up I just give it a year or two before people start marketing themselves as experts in 'optimizing' RoR, so they can sell the solutions to the performance problems that the 'peace and contentment' caused. Very similar with EJB and CMP. EJB offered a simplistic layer of abstaction that made data management simpler, but also caused a huge expense in the management of the EJB container! Secondly, if Ruby can offer more to the client, then the RoR programmer will charge more! Aren't labor economics fun? EJB in the end, didnt save anyone a cent. There is nothing new under the sun, but there is a never ending supply of idiots and people willing to pay them. Having witnessed the Web 2.0 sleaziness first hand, I do not trust anything that is associated with that world. If you want to deliver something really good to your client, give them standards that are unencumbered by licenscing constraints( where it is affordable of course ). I still do respect Java as a language because the semantics are well established. The changes that it introduced to C++ syntax were well accounted for. sincerely, jmz --- Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 21, 2006, at 9:08 PM, josh zeidner wrote: RoR: Why? because its Web 2.0( see CMP Media scandal ). The whole Web 2.0 thing( which RoR is invariably linked to ) has turned out to be a very stupid multi-level marketing scheme starring Tim O'Reilly. RoR offers no technological advantages over existing scripting languages, despite the magical claims of its proponents. My good (virtual) friend, Brent Ashley told me recently if Jesse James Garret is the father of AJAX, then you and I are the mailmen that all the kids look like. Back in the Tucson days, between getting .bombed by Running Start and starting at eBlox I wrote an article about Remote Scripting for developerWorks which was my first foray into technical writing. No technological advantage? I disagree. The brevity and readability... let's just say succintness most definitely is advantageous. For example, to wire up a Google-Suggest-like drop- down box I put this in my template: %= text_field_with_auto_complete :agent, :name, :size = 20 % And there is a controller method that generates the ul that gets rendered. There is a lot of convention, over configuration, and sometimes that is a bit too magical even for my tastes. But I can confidently say that RoR will be my preferred front-end technology for the foreseeable future and with loosely coupled back- end technologies, such as Solr, it's trivial to tie the best of breed pieces together, Java (or otherwise). Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Well, lets be empirical. Here's a real Rails site: http://communitywalk.com communitywalk.com is a RoR site that was developed at my current employer, usually by one or two pairs at a time, with most of the work done by the site owner (who is an employee too). I didn't work on it much (was mostly done when I came on), but I'd say they probably spent about 2-3 pair months of the total dev time optimizing performance. Maybe a lot less. It's a cool site, and it performs pretty well. I guess you'd call it Web 2.0, there's Google maps and lots of Javascript, but I wouldn't call it sleazy :) We're currently running it (MySql DB and Lighty/Rails) on a single Xen virtual machine on a new Xeon box. I think it's about in the 30-40 Gig/month bandwidth range - not sure on hits. Not huge traffic, but not tiny, considering it's all on one box. How would you quantify an impressive load for a site to handle and still have good performance? -- Chad On 6/24/06, josh zeidner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Erik, After having worked with countless web frameworks and dozens of languages I will say this: What you gain in development effort and 'syntactic sugar' you lose in performance. As all these sites prop up I just give it a year or two before people start marketing themselves as experts in 'optimizing' RoR, so they can sell the solutions to the performance problems that the 'peace and contentment' caused. Very similar with EJB and CMP. EJB offered a simplistic layer of abstaction that made data management simpler, but also caused a huge expense in the management of the EJB container! Secondly, if Ruby can offer more to the client, then the RoR programmer will charge more! Aren't labor economics fun? EJB in the end, didnt save anyone a cent. There is nothing new under the sun, but there is a never ending supply of idiots and people willing to pay them. Having witnessed the Web 2.0 sleaziness first hand, I do not trust anything that is associated with that world. If you want to deliver something really good to your client, give them standards that are unencumbered by licenscing constraints( where it is affordable of course ). I still do respect Java as a language because the semantics are well established. The changes that it introduced to C++ syntax were well accounted for. sincerely, jmz --- Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 21, 2006, at 9:08 PM, josh zeidner wrote: RoR: Why? because its Web 2.0( see CMP Media scandal ). The whole Web 2.0 thing( which RoR is invariably linked to ) has turned out to be a very stupid multi-level marketing scheme starring Tim O'Reilly. RoR offers no technological advantages over existing scripting languages, despite the magical claims of its proponents. My good (virtual) friend, Brent Ashley told me recently if Jesse James Garret is the father of AJAX, then you and I are the mailmen that all the kids look like. Back in the Tucson days, between getting .bombed by Running Start and starting at eBlox I wrote an article about Remote Scripting for developerWorks which was my first foray into technical writing. No technological advantage? I disagree. The brevity and readability... let's just say succintness most definitely is advantageous. For example, to wire up a Google-Suggest-like drop- down box I put this in my template: %= text_field_with_auto_complete :agent, :name, :size = 20 % And there is a controller method that generates the ul that gets rendered. There is a lot of convention, over configuration, and sometimes that is a bit too magical even for my tastes. But I can confidently say that RoR will be my preferred front-end technology for the foreseeable future and with loosely coupled back- end technologies, such as Solr, it's trivial to tie the best of breed pieces together, Java (or otherwise). Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On Jun 24, 2006, at 5:15 PM, josh zeidner wrote: After having worked with countless web frameworks and dozens of languages I will say this: What you gain in development effort and 'syntactic sugar' you lose in performance. But Ruby is not just a sugar coating of syntax. As all these sites prop up I just give it a year or two before people start marketing themselves as experts in 'optimizing' RoR, so they can sell the solutions to the performance problems that the 'peace and contentment' caused. Perhaps. There will certainly be the need for skilled folks in the RoR space in terms of deployment. You asked what sites I've deployed. At this point I don't have anything visible in production, primarily because I'm in a small academic group that has little sysadmin skills and servers to push what I've developed out. We do have a previous version online using RoR interacting with Kowari and a custom XML-RPC Lucene search server. We'll be putting the new and improved version with Solr replacing both the other two pieces shortly. Once that is up, I'll be announcing it. I run the system locally in development mode and it's doing quite well with no RoR caching, but we will certainly be enabling the caching facilities that RoR slickly offers as we need it. Very similar with EJB and CMP. EJB offered a simplistic layer of abstaction that made data management simpler Uh, you must have used a different EJB than I did. I don't have any happy experiences with EJB in practice or even in theory. But then again, I'm not even fond of relational databases in practice no matter how they are accessed... but ActiveRecord has made me smile a lot lately. Having witnessed the Web 2.0 sleaziness first hand, I do not trust anything that is associated with that world. If you want to deliver something really good to your client, give them standards that are unencumbered by licenscing constraints( where it is affordable of course ). I'm not following what you mean here... how does the Web 2.0 world relate to licensing constraints? I still do respect Java as a language because the semantics are well established I'm quite happy with Java as well, and I do more coding in it than in Ruby still. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
--- Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 24, 2006, at 5:15 PM, josh zeidner wrote: After having worked with countless web frameworks and dozens of languages I will say this: What you gain in development effort and 'syntactic sugar' you lose in performance. But Ruby is not just a sugar coating of syntax. I know, its a brave new world of app development... maybe im just getting older but this stuff is really beginning to lose its luster for me. Why is it that people absolutely refuse to accept the fact that there are no silver bullet solutions? I guess in a sales situation it is very hard to make a sale when youre competing against some bozo who is promising the world for penny. Always going for the quick buck. BTW- I hear the real estate market in Tucson is getting trippy. And so it goes... As all these sites prop up I just give it a year or two before people start marketing themselves as experts in 'optimizing' RoR, so they can sell the solutions to the performance problems that the 'peace and contentment' caused. Perhaps. There will certainly be the need for skilled folks in the RoR space in terms of deployment. You asked what sites I've deployed. At this point I don't have anything visible in production, Why is it that every Ruby expert that I run into has absolutely nothing to show? primarily because I'm in a small academic group that has little sysadmin skills and servers to push what I've developed out. We do have a previous version online using RoR interacting with Kowari and a custom XML-RPC Lucene search server. We'll be putting the new and improved version with Solr replacing both the other two pieces shortly. Once that is up, I'll be announcing it. I run the system locally in development mode and it's doing quite well with no RoR caching, but we will certainly be enabling the caching facilities that RoR slickly offers as we need it. Very similar with EJB and CMP. EJB offered a simplistic layer of abstaction that made data management simpler Uh, you must have used a different EJB than I did. Well i started with EJB before Sun even used the term j2EE. I think it was probably '98. Back then EJB was being sold as a nifty 'three tiered solution' to your web site woes( Websphere, at the time was not even an EJB server ). And it was simple. At first. It didnt have block enumerations though and I think that it will be block enumerations that will save RoR from the same fate of every other app framework in existence. :) So EJB got bigger and fatter, and alternatives Sprung up, etc... but here is my word of advice to potential IT buyers: INVEST IN PEOPLE NOT TECHNOLOGY. here is a movie where a NASA employee compares Ruby EJB, and a few other technologies: http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov I don't have any happy experiences with EJB in practice or even in theory. But then again, I'm not even fond of relational databases in practice no matter how they are accessed... but ActiveRecord has made me smile a lot lately. Having witnessed the Web 2.0 sleaziness first hand, I do not trust anything that is associated with that world. If you want to deliver something really good to your client, give them standards that are unencumbered by licenscing constraints( where it is affordable of course ). I'm not following what you mean here... how does the Web 2.0 world relate to licensing constraints? Well im not going to go that much into it, but Web 2.0 turns out to be a service mark owned by CMP Media LLC. -josh I still do respect Java as a language because the semantics are well established I'm quite happy with Java as well, and I do more coding in it than in Ruby still. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On 6/24/06, josh zeidner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it that every Ruby expert that I run into has absolutely nothing to show? I'm definitely not an expert, but I just showed you http://communitywalk.com in another post. http://zubio.com is another one we have done. There are a couple of others that are mostly complete, but not released publicly yet, as well as an internal agile project-management app. There's also this page: http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/RealWorldUsage -- Chad - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On Jun 21, 2006, at 9:08 PM, josh zeidner wrote: RoR: Why? because its Web 2.0( see CMP Media scandal ). The whole Web 2.0 thing( which RoR is invariably linked to ) has turned out to be a very stupid multi-level marketing scheme starring Tim O'Reilly. RoR offers no technological advantages over existing scripting languages, despite the magical claims of its proponents. My good (virtual) friend, Brent Ashley told me recently if Jesse James Garret is the father of AJAX, then you and I are the mailmen that all the kids look like. Back in the Tucson days, between getting .bombed by Running Start and starting at eBlox I wrote an article about Remote Scripting for developerWorks which was my first foray into technical writing. No technological advantage? I disagree. The brevity and readability... let's just say succintness most definitely is advantageous. For example, to wire up a Google-Suggest-like drop- down box I put this in my template: %= text_field_with_auto_complete :agent, :name, :size = 20 % And there is a controller method that generates the ul that gets rendered. There is a lot of convention, over configuration, and sometimes that is a bit too magical even for my tastes. But I can confidently say that RoR will be my preferred front-end technology for the foreseeable future and with loosely coupled back- end technologies, such as Solr, it's trivial to tie the best of breed pieces together, Java (or otherwise). Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On Jun 22, 2006, at 12:44 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: Can't you feel the peace and contentment in this block of code? Ruby is the language Buddha would have programmed in. Yeah, being pragmatic, Buddha probably would be using RoR. The more idealistic of us would likely be doing Smalltalk. After reading several thousand blogs which argue the pros and cons of RoR and seeing it used in a real shop, I think the benefit does largely come down to the Ruby language itself. Bingo. Rails is only good *because* of Ruby. The dynamic magic that can be pulled to create very elegant looking DSLs (domain- specific languages) is the secret sauce that makes Rails what is. Sure, you can do wacky reflective stuff in Java and get close, but the natures of those languages are different at a core layer. Of course there's still big cons compared to Java - my main gripes are lack of a real refactoring, intelligent code-completing IDE Many gripe about this. Personally I have had great success being interactive and using IRB tab completion to explore and learn an API. In Rails, script/console is amazing - your entire Rails environment immediately accessible live. , and lack of something as nice as Maven to automatically manage your external and cross-project dependencies. RubyGems manages 3rd party library dependencies nicely, and with Rails you can freeze it to a particular project. There is also Capistrano (formerly Switchtower) for project automation such as testing and deployment. I'm not aware of much in the way of automated deployment tools in the Java world that compares to Capistrano. Its much trickier to generically deploy a Java application because of the various ways every application server deploys. Oh, and speaking of XML parsing performance - AJAX is now officially old news. AJAJ (Async Javascript And JSON, Javascript Serialized Object Notation) is the wave of the future. We don't need no stinking XML! Sending back XML was old news almost a decade ago. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
And if you want to be wowed by what a difference a programming language makes, check out the video of DabbleDB: http://www.dabbledb.com/ Sure, you could program this same thing in Perl CGI, assembly language, C, Java, etc, but it was done using Seaside and the beauty of what is underneath shines through to the end product. Erik On Jun 22, 2006, at 4:08 PM, Andrew Lenards wrote: There was a Smalltalk/Squeak web framework that got some noticed at OOPSLA 2004 called Seaside 2. I think there was a similar version done for Java called Lakeshore. On 6/22/06, Chad Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/22/06, Thomas Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dr. Ralph Griswold (creator or SNOBOL and Icon programming languages) used to say that there's really nothing new under the sun in CS, it's all recycled. Yep, you certainly can get a lot of mileage out of just 1's and 0's... I have to note that this statement form you admire so much comes directly from Smalltalk of 20 years ago! So why hasn't anyone come up with Smalltalk On RailS (SOReS)? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
At 09:44 AM 6/22/2006, Chad wrote:
Cool. I checked out the REXML page. This quote is great:
Some of the common differences are that the Ruby API relies on block
enumerations, rather than iterators. For example, the Java code:
for (Enumeration e=parent.getChildren(); e.hasMoreElements(); ) {
Element child = (Element)e.nextElement(); // Do something with child
}
in Ruby becomes:
parent.each_child{ |child| # Do something with child }
Can't you feel the peace and contentment in this block of code? Ruby
is the language Buddha would have programmed in.
---
Dr. Ralph Griswold (creator or SNOBOL and Icon programming languages)
used to say that there's really nothing new under the sun in CS, it's all
recycled. I have to note that this statement form you admire so much comes
directly from Smalltalk of 20 years ago!
regards,
-tom
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On 6/22/06, Thomas Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dr. Ralph Griswold (creator or SNOBOL and Icon programming languages) used to say that there's really nothing new under the sun in CS, it's all recycled. Yep, you certainly can get a lot of mileage out of just 1's and 0's... I have to note that this statement form you admire so much comes directly from Smalltalk of 20 years ago! So why hasn't anyone come up with Smalltalk On RailS (SOReS)? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
There was a Smalltalk/Squeak web framework that got some noticed at OOPSLA 2004 called Seaside 2. I think there was a similar version done for Java called Lakeshore. On 6/22/06, Chad Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/22/06, Thomas Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dr. Ralph Griswold (creator or SNOBOL and Icon programming languages) used to say that there's really nothing new under the sun in CS, it's all recycled. Yep, you certainly can get a lot of mileage out of just 1's and 0's... I have to note that this statement form you admire so much comes directly from Smalltalk of 20 years ago! So why hasn't anyone come up with Smalltalk On RailS (SOReS)? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Solr looks pretty slick! Thanks for pointing this one out Erik. Any idea when it's coming out of incubator status? -warner On Jun 21, 2006, at 3:28 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote: Yeah, but what about Ruby on Rails?! ;) My current projects (yes, more than one) consist of a RoR front-end and a Solr (http://incubator.apache.org/solr) as a major backend piece via XML over HTTP (lowercase web services). Erik On Jun 20, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Rick Hightower wrote: H I find Tapestry to be powerful and robust. It seems to handle resources better than JSF. It is also really easy to create Tapestry components (out of other Tapestry components no less). JSF component creation (true components not composition components ala Facelets) is lacking. Many things in Tapestry just work the way they should. Many things in JSF don't just work the way they should. For example, in Tapestry when you get an error with a field, that field is automatically highlighted, in JSF you have to do it yourself. There is not reason why h:form could not do it for you. It just doesn't. However Tapestry takes a lot more effort to grasp and it takes a lot more effort to learn. It is complicated. It did not get simpler in Tapestry 4. Injection via an abstract getter, anyone? Shudder? I think I have grasped it (but I enjoy complex stuff), but to use it on a large team... YIKES! There is going to be a lot of developer body bags. JSF is far easier to learn and grasp. Back to your original question: When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I don't get to pick. The pick is usually done before I get there and I merely assist with the choice. I am thankful for this. Both have their issues. However as I breathe, I have an opinion: I think JSF is far superior for internal apps where the look and feel is not extremely important. The main criterion is developer productivity. I think Tapestry is far superior for external apps where the look and feel is critical. The main criterion is look and feel. Also if you are going to create a lot of custom components, Tapestry is a better choice as well. Facelets closes the gap (quite a bit) between Tapestry and JSF, but Tapestry is still a better platform for building components. On the other hand, there are more OTS components available for JSF. The docs for Tapestry are lacking. The amount of information about Tapestry pails in comparison to JSF I feel I am qualified to make the above statements having used both. I have not bias towards either. I can make money doing either. I enjoy working with both. Rick helped us to get our arms around Tapestry, Hibernate, and Spring. We are implementing all new J2EE applications in these technologies. Rick showed us how to pull all of these things together. Wayne Having taught both JSF and Tapestry workshops, I can tell you this. Developers get JSF quickly. Developers stumble with Tapestry. It takes twice as long to do the equiv CRUD lab in Tapestry versus the other. (It takes another two times as long to do it in classic Struts so...). Granted Tapestry is very powerful however that power begets complexity. Tapestry 5 should focus on developer productivity. Well you asked. -Original Message- From: Thomas Hicks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:29 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices Hopefully not. I didn't ask which app framework is better? I asked a specific question of Rick (and others) from his experience When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I was hoping for a summary based on his experiences with various frameworks. cheers, -tom At 12:16 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks area, please chime in). regards, -tom At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: . Nick, I was up your way working on a Tapestry project (a few weeks ago). I've been doing some Tapestry work on the side while doing JSF/Facelets/Spring/Hibernate(iBatis too) for my regular gig. I also updated our Tapestry course to Tapestry 4.0. TTYL --Rick --- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On 6/20/06, Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:[snip] Injection via an abstract getter, anyone?Shudder? shudder. I think I have grasped it (but I enjoy complex stuff), but to use it on alarge team... YIKES! There is going to be a lot of developer body bags. [snip] Granted Tapestry is very powerful however that power begets complexity.Tapestry 5 should focus on developer productivity. Well you asked. Blasphemer! Blasphemer! I can't take it. Comments and opinions about the human aspects of picking a technology!? How big is the project? How many developers? Developer team skill levels? Will someone random have to maintain/install it? How bloody much money do we have to do the project? Blasphemy!
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Erik, lowercase web services? What do you use to talk XML on the RoR side? One of the Ruby SOAP implementations, something homegrown, or something else? I work for a Rails shop, and we've done SOAP in one app. The one thing I noticed it had in common with Java (Axis) was that it NEVER just works, especially if you are talking to Microsoft on the other end. Even though it's a platform independent protocol, you always end up having to work around bugs or write some hacks to deal with type/array mismatches or something. -- Chad On 6/21/06, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, but what about Ruby on Rails?! ;) My current projects (yes, more than one) consist of a RoR front-end and a Solr (http://incubator.apache.org/solr) as a major backend piece via XML over HTTP (lowercase web services). Erik On Jun 20, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Rick Hightower wrote: H I find Tapestry to be powerful and robust. It seems to handle resources better than JSF. It is also really easy to create Tapestry components (out of other Tapestry components no less). JSF component creation (true components not composition components ala Facelets) is lacking. Many things in Tapestry just work the way they should. Many things in JSF don't just work the way they should. For example, in Tapestry when you get an error with a field, that field is automatically highlighted, in JSF you have to do it yourself. There is not reason why h:form could not do it for you. It just doesn't. However Tapestry takes a lot more effort to grasp and it takes a lot more effort to learn. It is complicated. It did not get simpler in Tapestry 4. Injection via an abstract getter, anyone? Shudder? I think I have grasped it (but I enjoy complex stuff), but to use it on a large team... YIKES! There is going to be a lot of developer body bags. JSF is far easier to learn and grasp. Back to your original question: When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I don't get to pick. The pick is usually done before I get there and I merely assist with the choice. I am thankful for this. Both have their issues. However as I breathe, I have an opinion: I think JSF is far superior for internal apps where the look and feel is not extremely important. The main criterion is developer productivity. I think Tapestry is far superior for external apps where the look and feel is critical. The main criterion is look and feel. Also if you are going to create a lot of custom components, Tapestry is a better choice as well. Facelets closes the gap (quite a bit) between Tapestry and JSF, but Tapestry is still a better platform for building components. On the other hand, there are more OTS components available for JSF. The docs for Tapestry are lacking. The amount of information about Tapestry pails in comparison to JSF I feel I am qualified to make the above statements having used both. I have not bias towards either. I can make money doing either. I enjoy working with both. Rick helped us to get our arms around Tapestry, Hibernate, and Spring. We are implementing all new J2EE applications in these technologies. Rick showed us how to pull all of these things together. Wayne Having taught both JSF and Tapestry workshops, I can tell you this. Developers get JSF quickly. Developers stumble with Tapestry. It takes twice as long to do the equiv CRUD lab in Tapestry versus the other. (It takes another two times as long to do it in classic Struts so...). Granted Tapestry is very powerful however that power begets complexity. Tapestry 5 should focus on developer productivity. Well you asked. -Original Message- From: Thomas Hicks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:29 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices Hopefully not. I didn't ask which app framework is better? I asked a specific question of Rick (and others) from his experience When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I was hoping for a summary based on his experiences with various frameworks. cheers, -tom At 12:16 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks area, please chime in). regards, -tom At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: . Nick, I was up your way working on a Tapestry
RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Erik, Good to hear from you. No one has asked me to work on a RoR project yet. I pretty much work on whatever the client wants (except for Struts; I won't do Struts). We are creating our own version of RoR called Presto. Presto is based on Spring, Hibernate, Facelets and JSF. It is similar to Trails. I just got a call this morning about a dotNet project using NHibernate and Spring.Net. Does anyone know if these frameworks are alive? I may do some NHibernate/Spring.Net work this year. Has anyone used these before? -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 3:29 AM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices Yeah, but what about Ruby on Rails?! ;) My current projects (yes, more than one) consist of a RoR front-end and a Solr (http://incubator.apache.org/solr) as a major backend piece via XML over HTTP (lowercase web services). Erik On Jun 20, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Rick Hightower wrote: H I find Tapestry to be powerful and robust. It seems to handle resources better than JSF. It is also really easy to create Tapestry components (out of other Tapestry components no less). JSF component creation (true components not composition components ala Facelets) is lacking. Many things in Tapestry just work the way they should. Many things in JSF don't just work the way they should. For example, in Tapestry when you get an error with a field, that field is automatically highlighted, in JSF you have to do it yourself. There is not reason why h:form could not do it for you. It just doesn't. However Tapestry takes a lot more effort to grasp and it takes a lot more effort to learn. It is complicated. It did not get simpler in Tapestry 4. Injection via an abstract getter, anyone? Shudder? I think I have grasped it (but I enjoy complex stuff), but to use it on a large team... YIKES! There is going to be a lot of developer body bags. JSF is far easier to learn and grasp. Back to your original question: When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I don't get to pick. The pick is usually done before I get there and I merely assist with the choice. I am thankful for this. Both have their issues. However as I breathe, I have an opinion: I think JSF is far superior for internal apps where the look and feel is not extremely important. The main criterion is developer productivity. I think Tapestry is far superior for external apps where the look and feel is critical. The main criterion is look and feel. Also if you are going to create a lot of custom components, Tapestry is a better choice as well. Facelets closes the gap (quite a bit) between Tapestry and JSF, but Tapestry is still a better platform for building components. On the other hand, there are more OTS components available for JSF. The docs for Tapestry are lacking. The amount of information about Tapestry pails in comparison to JSF I feel I am qualified to make the above statements having used both. I have not bias towards either. I can make money doing either. I enjoy working with both. Rick helped us to get our arms around Tapestry, Hibernate, and Spring. We are implementing all new J2EE applications in these technologies. Rick showed us how to pull all of these things together. Wayne Having taught both JSF and Tapestry workshops, I can tell you this. Developers get JSF quickly. Developers stumble with Tapestry. It takes twice as long to do the equiv CRUD lab in Tapestry versus the other. (It takes another two times as long to do it in classic Struts so...). Granted Tapestry is very powerful however that power begets complexity. Tapestry 5 should focus on developer productivity. Well you asked. -Original Message- From: Thomas Hicks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:29 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices Hopefully not. I didn't ask which app framework is better? I asked a specific question of Rick (and others) from his experience When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I was hoping for a summary based on his experiences with various frameworks. cheers, -tom At 12:16 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else
RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
--- Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will happily work with Tapestry or JSF. Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the highest bill rate. :o) Being an engineer, I tend to pick the one with the best value to my customer. :) It would appear that the app framework world is going through the same gyrations that the mainframe world did in the 80s. During this period we had professional consultants who aimed to increase their hourly wages by developing skills and reputation for 'big game mainframes'. These high wages were kept elevated by an ever increasing operative complexity, which quickly degraded into an excess 'bloat' that, at best was a liability to the customer rather than an advantage. During the late phases economic relationships between the consultants( ala Byte magazine and BITNET ) and the hardware providers( IBM, etc. ) had developed to block all but the most esoteric and complex solutions to computing problems from making it to market. The mainframes were designed for the consultants, not the customers. The end of this phase is referred to as the 'PC revolution'. The above situation resulted in a high barrier to entry for digital business causing a high demand for alternative solutions. This was coupled with the proliferation of new electronics suppliers in Asia( specifically China ) due to changes in military and trade policy. Thus, what was once considered the domain of geeky hobbyists became the stage for a phase of new billionaires, with the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. To address the question directly, which one is best? There is an assumed aspect to this question... best for whom? 1) the customer, 2) the developer. Certainly value and success involve a comparitive advantage for both parties. If history is to repeat itself, and it always does... the mainframes that did survive were the ones whose life support was the broadest and deepest, not necessarily the ones with the nicest trim, buttons, and knobs, etc. Despite this, the mainframe specialists as a species were doomed to extinction, even the ones who worked on the last of dinosaurs. Strangely, the UNIX crowd is now sitting with the cool kids again with the proliferation of Linux. Most of the new Linux hackers are kids, but you do find the occasional old senior amongst them offering up advice and cranky remarks about the Cold War and 'them damn camyanists'. As far as survival strategies go aim for standards, not bling.-jmz I am currently working with Scott Fau.h and another ArcMinder in San Diego. We are working with JSF, Spring, Hibernate (and soon iBatis). At night and sometimes at lunch, I work at a project based in New York which is JSF based (mostly advice and guidance and helping people out of sticky issues). In the early morning I've been working on a Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate project. I've been writing Tapestry custom components and helped them reconfigure the Spring/Hibernate bits (they had it configured a bit off). BTW, We are looking for people with JSF/Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate skills. I am tired and busy. -Original Message- From: Jon Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:16 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks area, please chime in). regards, -tom At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: . Nick, I was up your way working on a Tapestry project (a few weeks ago). I've been doing some Tapestry work on the side while doing JSF/Facelets/Spring/Hibernate(iBatis too) for my regular gig. I also updated our Tapestry course to Tapestry 4.0. TTYL --Rick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You
RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Flame bait? From: cara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:17 AM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices On 6/20/06, Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Injection via an abstract getter, anyone?Shudder? shudder. I think I have grasped it (but I enjoy complex stuff), but to use it on a large team... YIKES! There is going to be a lot of developer body bags. [snip] Granted Tapestry is very powerful however that power begets complexity. Tapestry 5 should focus on developer productivity. Well you asked. Blasphemer! Blasphemer! I can't take it. Comments and opinions about the human aspects of picking a technology!? How big is the project? How many developers? Developer team skill levels? Will someone random have to maintain/install it? How bloody much money do we have to do the project? Blasphemy!
RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
So Josh, let me get this straight if a Tapestry project pays $1 dollar an hour and a JSF project pays $100.00 an hour (or vice versa), you would work on the Tapestry project (or vice versa) because it is a better fit. Congrats! You are a much better man than me. I am not completely motivated by money but it is a key factor. As I said before, the technology is usually already picked before I start working on a project so in the sentence: Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the highest bill rate. :o) The phrase the one refers to the project not the technology. Being a low-life contractor/consultant, I tend not to pick the technology. :) I do get to pick who I work with (and in a sense what). If a project was doing Struts, the bill rate would have to be super nice for me to work on it. If JSF or Tapestry, well you get the picture... I really like working with Tapestry and JSF. Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will happily work with Tapestry or JSF. I've recommended Tapestry for some projects and JSF for others. I am fairly open-minded. I would have no moral issue working on a dotNet project or a RoR project. I prefer Java, but learning new things broadens you horizons and understanding of development in general. -Original Message- From: josh zeidner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:15 AM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices --- Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will happily work with Tapestry or JSF. Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the highest bill rate. :o) Being an engineer, I tend to pick the one with the best value to my customer. :) It would appear that the app framework world is going through the same gyrations that the mainframe world did in the 80s. During this period we had professional consultants who aimed to increase their hourly wages by developing skills and reputation for 'big game mainframes'. These high wages were kept elevated by an ever increasing operative complexity, which quickly degraded into an excess 'bloat' that, at best was a liability to the customer rather than an advantage. During the late phases economic relationships between the consultants( ala Byte magazine and BITNET ) and the hardware providers( IBM, etc. ) had developed to block all but the most esoteric and complex solutions to computing problems from making it to market. The mainframes were designed for the consultants, not the customers. The end of this phase is referred to as the 'PC revolution'. The above situation resulted in a high barrier to entry for digital business causing a high demand for alternative solutions. This was coupled with the proliferation of new electronics suppliers in Asia( specifically China ) due to changes in military and trade policy. Thus, what was once considered the domain of geeky hobbyists became the stage for a phase of new billionaires, with the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. To address the question directly, which one is best? There is an assumed aspect to this question... best for whom? 1) the customer, 2) the developer. Certainly value and success involve a comparitive advantage for both parties. If history is to repeat itself, and it always does... the mainframes that did survive were the ones whose life support was the broadest and deepest, not necessarily the ones with the nicest trim, buttons, and knobs, etc. Despite this, the mainframe specialists as a species were doomed to extinction, even the ones who worked on the last of dinosaurs. Strangely, the UNIX crowd is now sitting with the cool kids again with the proliferation of Linux. Most of the new Linux hackers are kids, but you do find the occasional old senior amongst them offering up advice and cranky remarks about the Cold War and 'them damn camyanists'. As far as survival strategies go aim for standards, not bling.-jmz I am currently working with Scott Fau.h and another ArcMinder in San Diego. We are working with JSF, Spring, Hibernate (and soon iBatis). At night and sometimes at lunch, I work at a project based in New York which is JSF based (mostly advice and guidance and helping people out of sticky issues). In the early morning I've been working on a Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate project. I've been writing Tapestry custom components and helped them reconfigure the Spring/Hibernate bits (they had it configured a bit off). BTW, We are looking for people with JSF/Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate skills. I am tired and busy. -Original Message- From: Jon Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:16 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On Jun 21, 2006, at 10:02 AM, Warner Onstine wrote: Solr looks pretty slick! Thanks for pointing this one out Erik. Any idea when it's coming out of incubator status? Solr is where it's at... hear me now, believe me later. As for the incubator... who knows? It's very mature as it is and the only thing really keeping it in the incubator is making sure we have a well rounded set of committers rather than most of them from CNET. I'm officially a committer and have made a couple of minor tweaks. There needs to be a bit of diversity for the incubator PMC to be satisfied. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
On Jun 21, 2006, at 12:35 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: lowercase web services? What do you use to talk XML on the RoR side? One of the Ruby SOAP implementations, something homegrown, or something else? Currently Solr returns back a custom XML layout and accepts a custom format. These are defined on the Solr wiki very nicely. I'm currently using REXML to parse the responses, and its working fine. But I think REXML's performance is not quite as quick as perhaps sending back YAML or even Ruby code to eval. Solr has a custom response handler hook so XML is not required, just the default. By lowercase web services I mean it's a service, and it's on the web, but it's not heavy SOAP. Erik, the RESTful one - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
--- Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Josh, let me get this straight if a Tapestry project pays $1 dollar an hour and a JSF project pays $100.00 an hour (or vice versa), you would work on the Tapestry project (or vice versa) because it is a better fit. Hey Rick, thanks for the response. I would work on Tapestry project if I thought it would result in long term success of my client( if she wins i win ). As soon as you reduce development to a labor function it tends to compress the value that a good engineer can offer. I usually don't get into these kinds of situations... im more interested in developing specific ideas. What language they are based in is largely irrelevant. My interest in java is a function of my career legacy and thats about it these days. Sun faces some serious problems. The phrase the one refers to the project not the technology. Hey, I hope you didnt take serious offense to my statement... Being a low-life contractor/consultant, I tend not to pick the technology. well i would guess to some degree the technology picks you... you cant specialize in everything! I really like working with Tapestry and JSF. Ive heard good things about Tapestry and it has LTC( Long Term Credibility- to use the microsoft term ). Good luck with that! Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will happily work with Tapestry or JSF. I've recommended Tapestry for some projects and JSF for others. I am fairly open-minded. I would have no moral issue working on a dotNet project or a RoR project. Well im not sure if youve encountered my commentary elsewhere, and this is a follow up on that... but anyway a summary on these two digital denizens: DOT NET: Arrg! This is why i dont like Dot NET: Its like buying real estate in Columbia. I have no idea what will happen to my investment in time and resources. Microsoft has shown zero respect for thier customers( and America in general ) in the past despite Steve Ballmer's 'DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS' chant. I don't blame them, competition is tough... i surely wouldnt subject myself to them and I doubt I would subject a client to them. RoR: Why? because its Web 2.0( see CMP Media scandal ). The whole Web 2.0 thing( which RoR is invariably linked to ) has turned out to be a very stupid multi-level marketing scheme starring Tim O'Reilly. RoR offers no technological advantages over existing scripting languages, despite the magical claims of its proponents. I prefer Java, but learning new things broadens you horizons and understanding of development in general. I still like Perl. Larry Wall is the best. Id work for him. Python is also cool. thanks, jmz -Original Message- From: josh zeidner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:15 AM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices --- Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will happily work with Tapestry or JSF. Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the highest bill rate. :o) Being an engineer, I tend to pick the one with the best value to my customer. :) It would appear that the app framework world is going through the same gyrations that the mainframe world did in the 80s. During this period we had professional consultants who aimed to increase their hourly wages by developing skills and reputation for 'big game mainframes'. These high wages were kept elevated by an ever increasing operative complexity, which quickly degraded into an excess 'bloat' that, at best was a liability to the customer rather than an advantage. During the late phases economic relationships between the consultants( ala Byte magazine and BITNET ) and the hardware providers( IBM, etc. ) had developed to block all but the most esoteric and complex solutions to computing problems from making it to market. The mainframes were designed for the consultants, not the customers. The end of this phase is referred to as the 'PC revolution'. The above situation resulted in a high barrier to entry for digital business causing a high demand for alternative solutions. This was coupled with the proliferation of new electronics suppliers in Asia( specifically China ) due to changes in military and trade policy. Thus, what was once considered the domain of geeky hobbyists became the stage for a phase of new billionaires, with the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. To address the question directly, which one is best? There is an assumed aspect to this question... best for whom? 1) the customer, 2) the developer. Certainly value and success involve a comparitive advantage for both parties. If history is to repeat itself, and it always does... the mainframes that did survive were the ones whose life support was the broadest
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
To Rick: I really haven't had a chance to use either of the framework (Spring.NET nor NHibernate) but I've tracked their progress. I caught a podcast from one of the devs for Spring.NET and it sounded like they was a fair amount of interest in the project. NHibernate hit version 1 around the beginning of the year. I believe Spring.NET hit version 1 about 2 months ago. I don't think either is dead -- but the .NET community really hasn't taken to the open source framework quite yet. *shrug* I know there are products and projects using the frameworks - I just have no clue how many. Andy On 6/21/06, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 21, 2006, at 12:35 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: lowercase web services? What do you use to talk XML on the RoR side? One of the Ruby SOAP implementations, something homegrown, or something else? Currently Solr returns back a custom XML layout and accepts a custom format. These are defined on the Solr wiki very nicely. I'm currently using REXML to parse the responses, and its working fine. But I think REXML's performance is not quite as quick as perhaps sending back YAML or even Ruby code to eval. Solr has a custom response handler hook so XML is not required, just the default. By lowercase web services I mean it's a service, and it's on the web, but it's not heavy SOAP. Erik, the RESTful one - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
I have to step in here and clarify that Rick (I'm sure) was being tongue in cheek. If he is anything he is the guy you turn to to clean out bloat. I assume it was recognized throughout the list that he was joking, but in case it was not, let me clarify for anyone who doesn't know him...he was. I work neither for nor with Rick but I have done both and he is on my one hand list of those I'd love to work with Anytime (fwiw the others include Nick, Erik, and Andy B., as well as Art who is lurking somewhere on this list). peaceOut. Jt On Jun 21, 2006, at 10:14 AM, josh zeidner wrote: --- Rick Hightower [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will happily work with Tapestry or JSF. Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the highest bill rate. :o) Being an engineer, I tend to pick the one with the best value to my customer. :) It would appear that the app framework world is going through the same gyrations that the mainframe world did in the 80s. During this period we had professional consultants who aimed to increase their hourly wages by developing skills and reputation for 'big game mainframes'. These high wages were kept elevated by an ever increasing operative complexity, which quickly degraded into an excess 'bloat' that, at best was a liability to the customer rather than an advantage. During the late phases economic relationships between the consultants( ala Byte magazine and BITNET ) and the hardware providers( IBM, etc. ) had developed to block all but the most esoteric and complex solutions to computing problems from making it to market. The mainframes were designed for the consultants, not the customers. The end of this phase is referred to as the 'PC revolution'. The above situation resulted in a high barrier to entry for digital business causing a high demand for alternative solutions. This was coupled with the proliferation of new electronics suppliers in Asia( specifically China ) due to changes in military and trade policy. Thus, what was once considered the domain of geeky hobbyists became the stage for a phase of new billionaires, with the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. To address the question directly, which one is best? There is an assumed aspect to this question... best for whom? 1) the customer, 2) the developer. Certainly value and success involve a comparitive advantage for both parties. If history is to repeat itself, and it always does... the mainframes that did survive were the ones whose life support was the broadest and deepest, not necessarily the ones with the nicest trim, buttons, and knobs, etc. Despite this, the mainframe specialists as a species were doomed to extinction, even the ones who worked on the last of dinosaurs. Strangely, the UNIX crowd is now sitting with the cool kids again with the proliferation of Linux. Most of the new Linux hackers are kids, but you do find the occasional old senior amongst them offering up advice and cranky remarks about the Cold War and 'them damn camyanists'. As far as survival strategies go aim for standards, not bling.-jmz I am currently working with Scott Fau.h and another ArcMinder in San Diego. We are working with JSF, Spring, Hibernate (and soon iBatis). At night and sometimes at lunch, I work at a project based in New York which is JSF based (mostly advice and guidance and helping people out of sticky issues). In the early morning I've been working on a Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate project. I've been writing Tapestry custom components and helped them reconfigure the Spring/Hibernate bits (they had it configured a bit off). BTW, We are looking for people with JSF/Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate skills. I am tired and busy. -Original Message- From: Jon Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:16 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks area, please chime in). regards, -tom At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: . Nick, I was up your way working on a Tapestry project (a few weeks ago). I've been doing some Tapestry work on the side while doing JSF/Facelets/Spring/Hibernate(iBatis too) for my regular gig. I also updated our Tapestry course to Tapestry 4.0. TTYL --Rick
RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
I believe she was applauding your inclusion of human aspects factors in making a technological decision and sarcastically saying that was blasphemy. I'm afraid Cara's getting kind of cynical after working at her current job location. They tend to be ratherum.behind on the technology and process management curve. -tom At 12:36 PM 6/21/2006, you wrote: Flame bait? -- From: cara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:17 AM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices On 6/20/06, Rick Hightower mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Injection via an abstract getter, anyone? Shudder? shudder. I think I have grasped it (but I enjoy complex stuff), but to use it on a large team... YIKES! There is going to be a lot of developer body bags. [snip] Granted Tapestry is very powerful however that power begets complexity. Tapestry 5 should focus on developer productivity. Well you asked. Blasphemer! Blasphemer! I can't take it. Comments and opinions about the human aspects of picking a technology!? How big is the project? How many developers? Developer team skill levels? Will someone random have to maintain/install it? How bloody much money do we have to do the project? Blasphemy! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks area, please chime in). regards, -tom At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: . Nick, I was up your way working on a Tapestry project (a few weeks ago). I've been doing some Tapestry work on the side while doing JSF/Facelets/Spring/Hibernate(iBatis too) for my regular gig. I also updated our Tapestry course to Tapestry 4.0. TTYL --Rick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices
Hopefully not. I didn't ask which app framework is better? I asked a specific question of Rick (and others) from his experience When would you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets? I was hoping for a summary based on his experiences with various frameworks. cheers, -tom At 12:16 PM 6/20/2006, you wrote: you may have just started the next religious war On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: Hey Rick, You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: the pros cons of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated by my lack of knowledge about what's out there and inspired by Matt Raible's comparison presentation (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ webframework-sweetspots.html). In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and Tapestry. When do you choose to use Tapestry over JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks area, please chime in). regards, -tom At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: . Nick, I was up your way working on a Tapestry project (a few weeks ago). I've been doing some Tapestry work on the side while doing JSF/Facelets/Spring/Hibernate(iBatis too) for my regular gig. I also updated our Tapestry course to Tapestry 4.0. TTYL --Rick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
