cantly
> >>> easier
> >>>> to modify or extend later.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> When I was younger, and monitors smaller and lines constrained, I too
> >>>> loved ramming as much functionality into the smallest of visual spaces
> >> in
> &g
hite space and simple, clean code.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's all about scroll wheels and big monitors! :)
>>>>>
>>>>> ... and Wicket and the super-fast modern JVMs... and t's still
>> quicker
>>>> and easier and ultimately less verbos
and Wicket and the super-fast modern JVMs... and t's still
> quicker
> > > and easier and ultimately less verbose to do something in Wicket/Java,
> > than
> > > pretty much any other Web framework, IMHO - regardless of Java as a
> > > language.
> >
... and Wicket and the super-fast modern JVMs... and t's still quicker
> > and easier and ultimately less verbose to do something in Wicket/Java,
> than
> > pretty much any other Web framework, IMHO - regardless of Java as a
> > language.
> > >
> >
with Wicket, or Groovy with Wicket - both are native
> JVM languages - would these give you greater benefits to your style?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Col.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 26 June
riginal Message-
From: Michael Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com]
Sent: 27 June 2013 02:28
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: A Wicket in Ruby
Scala is even more expressive and powerful than Ruby, so Scala + Wicket is
definitely my dream stack. I am just nervous about not having a bi
ess verbose to do something in Wicket/Java, than
> pretty much any other Web framework, IMHO - regardless of Java as a
> language.
> >
> > You could try Scala with Wicket, or Groovy with Wicket - both are native
> JVM languages - would these give you greater benefits to your st
framework, IMHO - regardless of Java as a language.
>
> You could try Scala with Wicket, or Groovy with Wicket - both are native JVM
> languages - would these give you greater benefits to your style?
>
> Cheers,
> Col.
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Mik
could try Scala with Wicket, or Groovy with Wicket - both are native JVM
languages - would these give you greater benefits to your style?
Cheers,
Col.
-Original Message-
From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 June 2013 06:48
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: A Wicket
That is a good question that I have been mulling over these last few says.
I think that I need to suck it up and just re-familiarize with Java -- it
is less verbose, with annotations and closures now, right? -- for all of
the benefits that the JVM with Wicket will bring me. I got a bit spoiled by
y
Mike,
I hate to be the old cynic and doomsayer, but generally I find that whenever a
two programming technologies are 'crossed' over, with the idea that you'll get
the advantages of both - the exact opposite occurs and actually you end up with
a technology that only has the disadvantages of bot
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Mike Pence wrote:
> Am I crazy?
Yes, but that shouldn't stop you.
While a straight java -> ruby conversion is possible, I doubt it will
lead to a satisfying result. I'd rather do a Wicket "inspired" new
development, which would lead to a better fit in the ruby la
12 matches
Mail list logo
