On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 08:30:52 -0200, adasal <adam.salt...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Christian,
Hi, guys!
You know Tapestry very well.
Do you have any points of comparison with JEE JSF, e.g. Ice Faces?
It seems to me that JSF is very similar (by borrowed design) to Tapestry.
But there must be technical points of significant difference?
I know very little about JSF, but Tapestry 5 is very, very different from
JSF. The similarity is that their built on Java and are component
(event)-oriented frameworks.
* Tapestry 5 doesn't use XML configuration besides web.xml, JSF does.
* JSF has a very complicated lifecycle, Tapestry doesn't.
* Tapestry is built and configured on an IoC framework, JSF doesn't, so
you can adapt it to your needs way simpler than JSF.
* Writing components in Tapestry is way easier.
* Tapestry has live class reloading, JSF doesn't.
* In Tapestry, pages are objects in a very OOP sense, while JSF, IMHO,
doesn't have a page concept. In Tapestry, there's a 1:1:1 relationship
between the page class, its template and its URL.
* Tapestry has its own template engine, not using JSP. JSF uses JSP (which
sucks) or Facelets (which its own documentation says that it was inspired
from Tapestry's template engine).
* Tapestry doesn't store page rendering information anywhere, JSF does.
* Tapestry 5 has native AJAX support. As far as I know, JSF doesn't have.
* JSF is an specification with two implementations which aren't 100%
compatible with each other. Tapestry is a framework.
I could go on and on . . .
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer,
and instructor
Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda.
http://www.arsmachina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
