Hi Aaron, Frank, and gang, What I found out with GWT when I was using it for my dissertation is that Wonder has two channels that tend to be handy with GWT. First is the ReST approach and second is the AJAX frameworks.
With the AJAX frameworks, there is a tricky issue with "hooks" provided in the GWT frameworks for acquiring other JavaScript objects. The trick in this case is to make a run-time bind the GWT component to the JS provided in Wonder's implementation of AJAX. The other binding goes to the parent AJAX object running in the browser. The other approach is to bind to ERRest verbs via the standard XMLHttpRequest, which GWT inherits from AJAX. Now, I adopted use of OGF's DFDL standard to tell my GWT objects what to expect from ERRest. Also, the ReST based objects observe the same run-time binding as do their WO-AJAX counter-parts. I found that there is a trade-off in efficiency between the two approaches. The Wonder AJAX can carry the same info as OGF's DFDL, and load straight from the Wonder app. Whereas the DFDL approach either forces a special DFDL Wonder app or at least a binding to the Wonder app of some sort. At one point, I was planning on augmenting Marcus' book or simply adding a volume to it on the subject of Wonder with GWT. The major advantage of GWT as I see it is not with the learning curve. Rather, the idea is to have a compiler that knows the quirks of each web browser targeted. Some web browsers comply well with standards and others don't. An easy habit to fall into with raw AJAX is to concentrate only on one browser, and fail when it comes any other browser the user may choose. With GWT, handling those quirks is an inherited trait. That being said, I hope also to learn up on Beniot's Montage. It looks pretty exciting. It may offer even better frameworks than GWT, but I can't say for sure at this time. The trials will tell. Any who, that is my two cents on the subject. I hope to publish a copy of my dissertation for the public soon. I probably need to include an appendix with a tutorial on GWT with Wonder. V/R, Daniel Beatty, Ph.D., IEEE Certified Software Development Professional (CSDP) Computer Scientist Code 474300D 1 Administration Circle. M/S 1109 China Lake, CA 93555 [email protected] (760)939-7097 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Aaron Rosenzweig Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 8:30 PM To: Frank Stock Cc: [email protected] Development Subject: Re: Which RIA Hello Frank and others, It's tough isn't it? There's a lot of stuff out there. I didn't know about Vaadin but I watched their video and thought. how is this different than Google Web Toolkit? You spend all of your time in pure java but the Javascript Ajax stuff is built for you. so you don't have to really learn JS and have that context switch in your head. Sounds good, I guess. and Vaadin is built on top of GWT. but then what is it really doing above and beyond GWT? I don't know, I didn't look at it further. I can't help but think that anything based on GWT gives someone an initial bang for the buck just because if they know Java that's all they have to worry about. But at some point you'll hit a wall and not be able to do something cool in the browser that you want to do. not without learning JS and extra work. I also don't think GWT was truly designed with Mobile in mind. Notice the word "truly." Frank, it's really up to you. Spend some time to experiment, give yourself two weeks or so, and make your best guess. This is a religious decision, it always is. Personally I'd suggest you communicate over REST with something like ERRest. Pick a good Javascript library that makes sense to you. When I look at it all there are two main camps: 1) HTML based page-to-page Javascript frameworks a) Fast to learn b) Pretty and looks nice (at first) c) Unfortunately becomes hard to maintain over time and very brittle 2) Single page app non-HTML Javascript frameworks a) Large learning curve b) Pretty and performant c) Feels like writing a true application, easy to maintain and extend over time. "Mojo" was the preliminary example of a JS framework that adhered to #1. Not many people know about it but it was the way to write apps for the WebOS phones like the Palm Pre. There are many other frameworks that work in almost the same way, the most famous is JQuery-Mobile. It has been proven that this is *not* the way to long term sanity. It is a short term *win* or a cool way to make a mobile app in a weekend but it will bite you over time. Because of this Palm completely dropped "Mojo." "JO" was the first real example that resonated with me of a JS framework that adhered to #2. It is so nice to write an "app" in javascript. It generates the HTML for you, all you have to think about is your business logic. No surprise, JO was made by a WebOS guy because those guys believed in javascript like no other. Smart developers took note, and so did Palm. They then went on to create "Enyo" as the replacement for Mojo. I don't see any real advantage of it over JO except that they also created "Ares" as a nice GUI development environment that runs in the web browser but feels just like Interface Builder. Both Enyo and Ares are open source and can run on your hardware. Here's a video of Ares / Enyo in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQkzUDtiC-I My advice to you, as someone who has played with a bunch of solutions, is to take Enyo / Ares for a serious spin because they are completely open and very polished. I really don't care what is "hot." If I did, I wouldn't have chosen WO. I always look for the best, the truth. Use REST via ERRest to communicate with your app. Use something like "lawn chair" JS for persistence when Internet is not available. Give Benoit's Mantage framework / IDE some more consideration too. He does have a WO background after all. The IDE part seems rather closed to me but if that doesn't bother you, check it out. He gave a comparison of it to Enyo but it was very high level. I cannot tell you which is better and for what, I haven't really tried Montage. Aaron Rosenzweig / Chat 'n Bike <http://www.chatnbike.com> e: [email protected] t: (301) 956-2319 Chat 'n Bike<http://www.chatnbike.com/WebObjects/FamilyCycleGroupOrder.woa/Contents/WebServerResources/images/chat_n_bike_logo_small.png> Chat 'n Bike<http://www.chatnbike.com/WebObjects/FamilyCycleGroupOrder.woa/Contents/WebServerResources/images/dealers/usa.jpg> On May 21, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Frank Stock <[email protected]> wrote: Hi All, I want to build new applications with a RIA framework. I did some (very basic) testing with EmberJS and MontagesJS. For me MontageJS looks very good, but I don't want to be connected with Github, I can't let my projects on open source (all in house applications - we build mainly administration like order-processing). Working with EmeberJS in Webstorm looked good. Can someone give me any advice? Thanks in advance, Frank Stock Chem-lab nv Belgium _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/aaron%40chatnbike.com This email sent to [email protected]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
