Steve.
1. I agree on your comments about JBuilder 4. Great product.
2. weblogic is not the only servlet container with problems.
After working with iPlanet and JRun, I am in the conclusion
that most likely all containers have 'issues'.
I agree that having 'issues' and being a 'hack' are two
different things. Struts did not come out of the gate being
what it is today.
3. Do you have a preference on Tag editors/creators?
I'm looking for something that creates/edit tags like I would a bean.
Does JBuilder Enterprise do this and I'm just missing something?
- Malcolm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven D. Wilkinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:48 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: which development tool to use?
>
>
> Dan,
>
> You still have the negative comment about Struts and weblogic.
> It would be nice
> if you corrected that before doing whatever it is your going to
> do with this
> massive thing.
> ==================================================================
> ==================================
> I believe the "hack" was considered a work around, because
> WebLogic does not
> support the servlet startup concept in their implementation of
> Servlet2.2 api.
> FYI, there are a lot of commercial application servers that don't
> do a good job
> implementing the Servlet2.2 api. My guess is that this will be
> the same with
> Servlet2.3. So please use the term work around, because they
> don't support the
> Servlet api. I know it's picky, but I think a "hack" brings negative
> associations with 'struts'. IMHO, it's terms like 'hack' that
> cause people to
> respond so negatively to 'struts' questions on the weblogic support news
> groups.
>
> Another criticism about you comparison. Under struts you put the
> following:
> ==================================================================
> =========
> -Requires a lot of redundancy per form field.
> I disagree with this. Now that the JSP pages can use the dot
> operator you don't
> have to expose attributes to the ActionForm implementation.
>
> For example:
> public class Registration extends ActionForm {
> private User user = new User();
> public User getUser() {
> return user;
> }
>
> public void setUser(User user) {
> this.user = user;
> }
> }
>
> public final class User implements Serializable {
> private String firstName = null;
> private String lastName = null;
> private String title = null;
> private String userName = null;
> private String password = null;
> private String confirmPassword = null;
> private String passwordHint = null;
> private Address userAddress = new Address();
> private Address billingAddress = new Address();
> private String email = null;
>
> ... getters/and setter for each
> }
>
> And The address class has traditional address1, address2, etc.
>
> Now in the JSP page you can do this:
> <html:text property="user.userName" size="34" maxlength="30"/>
> <html:text property="user.firstName" size="15" maxlength="25" />
> <html:text property="user.lastName" size="17" maxlength="25" />
> <html:text property="user.userAddress.address1" size="34" maxlength="50"/>
> <html:text property="user.userAddress.address2" size="34" maxlength="50"/>
>
> Now please show me where the redunancy is on the form page? I
> agree prior to
> the new reflection and introspection logic within the util
> package, you did have
> to have redundant stuff in the implemented ActionForm. Now that
> is not true.
> Please correct this. It is negative on 'struts'.
>
>
> BTW, I also observed positive you were in describing you own framework.
> +Uses JSP as controller, so you don't have to restart the server
> all the time.
> +Uses a StateManager class to abstract the problem of
> statelessness on the web.
> +JSP's don't have to know which bean(s) their fields are bound to.
>
> I take it your's doesn't have any negatives? Just kidding. I
> thought I read an
> earlier message where you abandoned your effort to support
> struts. Is that
> true?
>
> I don't mean to pick on your document, but you did offer it to
> the mail list.
> Since I'm such a strong supporter of 'struts' I just HAD to
> comment. Hope you
> don't mind.
>
> FYI, with JBuilder4 Professional Edition you have the ability to debug JSP
> pages. Professional is in between Foundation and Enterprise.
>
> Personally I use JBuilder4 for debugging. I was converted on my current
> contract to JBuilder4. It is soo much better than JBuilder3 and
> 3.5.1. I never
> could get with the interface on NetBeans or Forte. It seemed
> klunky to me.
> However, I'm an old JBuilder3 user. I did have to abandon
> JBuilder3 because it
> used to have extremely high disk activity. I have used vim since
> then until
> now. JBuilder4 is really good and it is nice to have a Java
> based product have
> such high marks. Another Java based product that I TRULY love is
> TogetherJ4.
> This blows away Rational's offering. Did you know that you could
> generate a
> sequence diagram automatically? Then did you know that you could
> change that to
> a collaboration diagram and back? Truly awesome product. FYI,
> when I encounter
> such wonderful Java based products I usually buy them. However,
> I do have my
> own company otherwise the TogetherJ4 purchase would have been a
> little tough.
>
> Anyway, thanks for your effort. What are you going to do with
> all this compiled
> information?
>
> Steve
