I'm going to start responding here to a few interesting points in this thread ... some will probably be repeated later, either by me or others (I haven't studied it all yet), but
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 16:47:23 +0000, Adam Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In my experience on big projects, developers must understand the > intricacies of HTTP request and response, GETs, POSTs etc to allow them > to implement their Command Pattern effectively. Otherwise it leads to > Bitter Java-type anti-patterns and spaghetti code and unmaintainable apps. I'm afraid you'll have to show me that this outcome is likely before I'll believe any generalizations of this kind of statement. In particular, what specific anti-patterns do you think developers will fall prey to? > I think Tak's new paradigm of page-driven Struts development will mask > this nitty-gritty stuff, and on large or complex apps will lead to these > problems - with poor re-use, rigid design of the Command Pattern being > locked to the UI, lack of logic in the Command Pattern implementation etc. > > But this of course may well be no problem if this paradigm intended for > lightweight, quick to deploy apps. > > What intrigues me about JSF which I haven't been able to find out yet, > is whether JSF is also only meant for light-weight apps. Does JSF's > tendency towards page-driven Commands Pattern implementation as Craig > mentioned put it in danger of encouraging such Bitter Java anti-patterns? > JSF cares *only* about the view. It provides enough capability to serve as an application controller for simple applications, but that isn't where it's focused. If you want fancy application level things (like dialog control, authentication redirects, and all that) you need a controller for application level issues in addition. That being said, it is far from clear to me that the capabilities JSF does provide are insufficient by themselves for medium-to-large scale applications -- the definition of "lightweight" is going to be interesting to identify :-). > I also gather that JSF's Controller implementation of the MVC framework > is not nearly as robust as the Struts implementation. Would a large > application that wanted to use JSF also need Struts? You can certainly use the two together via the Struts-Faces integration library -- that is targeted at making it possible for existing Struts applications to migrate without throwing away their investment in existing code. For new applications, there's a very large amount of overlap in functionality between JSF and Struts ... and I suspect many people will not find JSF+Struts 1.x to have enough value add to balance the extra complexity of learning and maintaining two technologies instead of one. > Adam Craig --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
