Another blog, another comment: http://www.oreillynet.com/onjava/blog/2007/02/apache_struts_2_ga_release.html#comment-506880
"struts2 missed the boat. It has a nice "vintage" feeling to it, and it may be able to ride the marketing clout that goes with the name, but the technology feels like a "blast from the past". If you are on jdk5 and want an action-oriented framework, go with stripes." On 3/9/07, Vinny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm just happy your post didn't conclude with "... and that is why I'm switching to Flex..." It's Friday, Vinny On 3/9/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Just some rambling ruminations from my blog ... > > As might be expected, the Struts 2 GA announcement had its share of > comments on The Server Side last week. [1] > > One subtopic was push versus pull. As with many terms, I think we > sometimes use "push" and "pull" to mean different things. Sometimes we > mean it to contrast component versus action paradigms [2]. Other > times, we mean to contrast creating a custom context (or API) for each > page that exposes only what that page is suppose to know (push), or > whether we should create a global context (or API) that can be exposed > to every page, so each page can pick and choose (pull) whatever it > wants. [3] > > Another use of the "push/pull" term is to contrast "merge" templates, > like Velocity and FreeMarker, with "scriptlet" templates, like ASP, > JSP, and PHP. In this usage, the point is whether it is better to push > out to the page a prepared context, or whether the page should use > scriplets to pull values from the platform's shared context. > > One benefit of push is that it easier to use the technology outside of > the environment, since we can create a prepared context independent of > the target platform. One benefit of pull is that its easier to share > values with other application resources, since the context is shared. > > Struts 1 tends to muddle this kind of push and pull. ActionForms are > push, but we also provide a lot of servlet attributes which pages need > to pull from one of the platform's scopes (page, servlet, > application). The Velocity support for Struts uses a chained context > to provide access to a Velocity context as well as the platform > contexts. > > Struts 2 creates its own context that includes references to the > servlet scopes (as plain-old Maps). In this way, S2 provides the > benefits of both push and pull. For testing, it's easy to create our > own action context, and at runtime, we can access the usual servlet > resources. Another benefit of wrapping pull-within-push is that we can > provide "first class" tag support for JSP, FreeMarker and Velocity. > > Personally, I'm a fan of the template approach. The Struts 1 tags > mitigated the damage JSP scriplets were causing back in the day [4]; > before JSTL, stock JSPs were a ugly, inelegant mess. (And before > Velocity people got involved in JSTL, the JSTL was a mess too.) > > If there is a single reason why Struts 1 was so successful, it was > because we provided a JSP taglib when everyone else (Barracuda, > JPublish, Maverick, Tapestry, Turbine, among others) was focused on > templates and other alternative solutions. > > Over the years, I've consulted with some large concerns that > standardized on templates pre-y2k. The technology worked well, but my > clients eventually replaced the templates with Struts and JSPs. Not > because JSP was "better", but because JSP worker drones are easy to > hire. As Craig said [5], project managers tend to choose "mainstream" > technologies, regardless. We already have a hammer, so every problem > must be a nail. > > Ironically, Struts 2 "levels the playing field", so that "alternative" > technologies like Velocity, Freemarker, and AJAX are on equal footing > with "mainstream" technologies like JSP, JSF, and, well, AJAX. :) > > - Ted. > * http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/ > > > [1] http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=44429 > > [2] http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=44429#228491 > > [3] http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine/turbine-2.3.2/pullmodel.html > > [4] http://www.servlets.com/soapbox/problems-jsp.html > > [5] http://www.servlets.com/soapbox/problems-jsp-reaction.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Ghetto Java: http://www.ghettojava.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
