Re: A Wicket in Ruby
I've found the combination of Wicket + Scala to be very productive. Just make sure you use Fodel from Wicketstuff When things get tricky, simply reduce the problem down to a java quick start and proceed as usual. I find that 99% of the time making a quick start solves the problem, when I realize what I'm doing wrong. Peter. On 26 June 2013 17:28, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
Forgive my newbie questions, but what is Fodel? Is JBoss the most promising app server to build on? I have always felt like any sufficiently advanced Rails app is indistinguishable from an ad-hoc reinvention of a poorly spec'ed Java app server... On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Peter Henderson peter.hender...@starjar.com wrote: I've found the combination of Wicket + Scala to be very productive. Just make sure you use Fodel from Wicketstuff When things get tricky, simply reduce the problem down to a java quick start and proceed as usual. I find that 99% of the time making a quick start solves the problem, when I realize what I'm doing wrong. Peter. On 26 June 2013 17:28, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Mike Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: Forgive my newbie questions, but what is Fodel? https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/blob/master/jdk-1.6-parent/scala-extensions-parent/wicket-scala/src/main/scala/org/wicketstuff/scala/Fodel.scala?source=cc Is JBoss the most promising app server to build on? I have always felt like any sufficiently advanced Rails app is indistinguishable from an ad-hoc reinvention of a poorly spec'ed Java app server... I'd prefer Jetty/Tomcat than Java EE application server. On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Peter Henderson peter.hender...@starjar.com wrote: I've found the combination of Wicket + Scala to be very productive. Just make sure you use Fodel from Wicketstuff When things get tricky, simply reduce the problem down to a java quick start and proceed as usual. I find that 99% of the time making a quick start solves the problem, when I realize what I'm doing wrong. Peter. On 26 June 2013 17:28, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
So when you need to add background jobs, message queues, user authentication and such, do you just grab your favorite java libraries for those kinds of things? On Jun 27, 2013, at 11:34 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Mike Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: Forgive my newbie questions, but what is Fodel? https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/blob/master/jdk-1.6-parent/scala-extensions-parent/wicket-scala/src/main/scala/org/wicketstuff/scala/Fodel.scala?source=cc Is JBoss the most promising app server to build on? I have always felt like any sufficiently advanced Rails app is indistinguishable from an ad-hoc reinvention of a poorly spec'ed Java app server... I'd prefer Jetty/Tomcat than Java EE application server. On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Peter Henderson peter.hender...@starjar.com wrote: I've found the combination of Wicket + Scala to be very productive. Just make sure you use Fodel from Wicketstuff When things get tricky, simply reduce the problem down to a java quick start and proceed as usual. I find that 99% of the time making a quick start solves the problem, when I realize what I'm doing wrong. Peter. On 26 June 2013 17:28, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: So when you need to add background jobs, message queues, user authentication and such, do you just grab your favorite java libraries for those kinds of things? Yes. Often they provide much more functionality than what is in the JEE stack. I prefer Spring Framework than JEE. It provides integrations for almost anything and is much more portable than JEE implementations. On Jun 27, 2013, at 11:34 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Mike Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: Forgive my newbie questions, but what is Fodel? https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/blob/master/jdk-1.6-parent/scala-extensions-parent/wicket-scala/src/main/scala/org/wicketstuff/scala/Fodel.scala?source=cc Is JBoss the most promising app server to build on? I have always felt like any sufficiently advanced Rails app is indistinguishable from an ad-hoc reinvention of a poorly spec'ed Java app server... I'd prefer Jetty/Tomcat than Java EE application server. On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Peter Henderson peter.hender...@starjar.com wrote: I've found the combination of Wicket + Scala to be very productive. Just make sure you use Fodel from Wicketstuff When things get tricky, simply reduce the problem down to a java quick start and proceed as usual. I find that 99% of the time making a quick start solves the problem, when I realize what I'm doing wrong. Peter. On 26 June 2013 17:28, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard
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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments for viruses. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
Hi Michael, You may find a quickstart for Wicket+Scala at https://github.com/jWeekend/LegUp/tree/master/wicket-scala It is a bit out of date but I'll update it tomorrow. Pull requests are also welcome. On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Michael Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com wrote: 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments for viruses. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr
RE: A Wicket in Ruby
Mike, I've never used Scala + Wicket - but the idea doesn't worry me. For specific Scala issues, I'm sure that there is plenty of help, and for the Wicket stuff, the API is identical, and everything here is totally applicable... (or at least I assume)! :) Cheers, Col. -Original 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 big peer support community when things get tricky. On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:20 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments for viruses
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments for viruses. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
RE: A Wicket in Ruby
Mike, Java is still pretty verbose, for all 'recent' improvements - I don't think that will really ever change, but then I don't see that as an issue. My personal style of coding is to write simple, obvious, testable, but ultimately verbose, code. Code that anyone can read, and understand what and why I'm attempting something - with the absolute minimum of comments. But that's just me! :) I've never understood writing one line of code, that takes five lines of comments to fully explain what and why it's attempting, when you could write 3 lines of code with no comments - and would be significantly 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 code, but now I love tons of white 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 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 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 in Ruby 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 years of Ruby, but man, do you pay for that lack of compile-time checking and type safety over and over again -- especially with regard to performance and endlessly climbing stack traces over typos. On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Colin Rogers colin.rog...@objectconsulting.com.au wrote: 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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments for viruses. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied
RE: A Wicket in Ruby
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 both and the advantages of neither. After all, Wicket in Java works really well... how would ruby improve it over Java? Or Scala in the JVM? Or Groovy on the JVM? Like I said - sorry - I don't wish to negative, but it seems like a thankless task awaits you! :) Cheers, Col. -Original Message- From: Mike Pence [mailto:mike.pe...@gmail.com] Sent: 22 June 2013 02:21 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: A Wicket in Ruby So I have this crazy idea to try to write some subset of Wicket using CRuby and the variety of technologies it employs (EventMachine, etc.) Hard to know where to start though, or how best to form a mental model of what Wicket does vs. doing a straight class-to-class conversion. Maybe there is a test suite in the wicket source I should consider. Of course, there is nothing like stepping through the code to understand the lifecyle of a wicket request (and to see how it persists session data, especially). Am I crazy? EMAIL DISCLAIMER This email message and its attachments are confidential and may also contain copyright or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not forward the email or disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the message and any associated attachments. Any views, opinions, conclusions, advice or statements expressed in this email message are those of the individual sender and should not be relied upon as the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the considered view, opinion, conclusions, advice or statement of this company. Every care is taken but we recommend that you scan any attachments for viruses. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: A Wicket in Ruby
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Mike Pence mike.pe...@gmail.com 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 language and ecosystem. Martijn -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
