I personally find that Hibernate, Spring, etc. are easier to write than JDBC and like technologies once you have a toolkit for your applications in place and understand the technologies. Reuse is the key. If you learn to code to runtime rather than to compile time, then whether your job is simple or complex, unless you are talking about so simple it is a home sort of deal, the same solutions are the best.
I only wish that everyone could absorb the wonderful lessons in Chapter One of the GoF Design Patterns. There is where it is at. If code, whatever language you might like, does not follow those deep ideals, then something is wrong, in my opinion. I had hoped that Struts committers would have a serious "lessons learned" for Struts 1.3.* but that seems highly unlikely now that commons-chain is de rigour. Too bad in my opinion. I find that one can somewhat easily build an application like Struts on one's own in a few months if one has learned from the experience of the engineering community these past ten years or so. Spring does this. Struts could, but does not. Why I am not sure. I have some guesses but only guesses. On 12/14/05, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No I wasn't speaking about JSF. In my opinion it isn't very complex > and forceful unless you write new UI components. I was more refering > to use Spring and Hibernate to build a full domain model when you > could only use JDBC and get the job done. I think JSF is good even for > simple applications (especially if your IDE supports it but it not > mandatory) but I may be wrong. Some would prefer to use Struts. JSF is > still so young compare to Struts. > > On 12/14/05, Martin Gainty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Alexandre- > > If the hammer (I assume you mean JSF) is too forceful a tool to use for > your > > set of task(s) > > what alternative framework/technology would you suggest and why? > > Merci, > > Martin- > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Alexandre Poitras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@struts.apache.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 2:59 PM > > Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Is JSF ready? > > > > > > I totally agree about what you said but I think JSF can be used for > > simple applications too. You can send ResultSet directly to a lot of > > components. It is very handy for small applications where you don't > > need a full domain model and service layer. > > > > I agree with what you said about frameworks in general. Java > > developers sometimes tend too much to use the full "traditional" (not > > "standard", dakota...) stack of JEE techonologies (Struts or other > > view technologies, Spring, Hibernate or TopLink or DAO) for simple > > problem. They are terrific tools but in my opinion there is no need to > > squash an insect with a hammer. > > > > On 12/14/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, December 14, 2005 9:37 am, Bill Schneider said: > > > > On the other hand, JSF does make doing some simple things hard. > > > > > > I think this is actually an excellent point, and I was thinking of it > the > > > other day and forgot to make it myself... > > > > > > You can come up with numerous examples of things that make simple > things > > > harder, and yet make more difficult things easier. Hibernate to me is > an > > > excellent example... If your just updating a field or two in a > database, > > > Hibernate tends to make that simple job a lot harder (more work to do > for > > > example). But, if you have a number of tables with various linkages > and > > > such to be updated based on some actual objects, Hibernate clearly > makes > > > that chore easier. > > > > > > The true benefit of the solution doesn't become apparent until the > > > complexity of the problem reaches some undefined break-even threshold. > > > > > > JSF may well be the same way. It may be that a small app with a few > pages > > > and just a few simple forms might be (or at least seem) more difficult > in > > > JSF, but it may also be true that real-world business apps with some > real > > > complexity to them become easier with it. I am at least willing to > > > entertain that possibility, especially since my own experience with it > has > > > admittedly NOT been anything other than relatively simple apps (a blog > in > > > Shale, which I never completely finished, for example). > > > > > > Everyone has made some good points in this discussion. For me, the > bottom > > > line remains: I have some big doubts about JSF, but I'm not ready to > > > dismiss it at all. Even if it isn't the de facto Java web development > > > standard at some point, I think there is no doubt it will be a player > in > > > some capacity, so keeping an eye on it and re-evaluating it every so > often > > > is just prudent IMO. > > > > > > Frank > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Alexandre Poitras > > Québec, Canada > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Alexandre Poitras > Québec, Canada > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
