You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Dominic Gagne <do...@gagne.com> on 2002/10/05 20:08:27 UTC

Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

I hope I'm asking the right mailing list ...  I'd like to know the
differences between Struts and Turbine project. I'm currently using Turbine
framework to build a web application and I see that Struts could offer me
the same kind of solution, am I right ? I would also like to know which
project in moving faster and has more chance the stay alive ?

Thanks,
Dominic



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by micael <ca...@harbornet.com>.

I think we can all agree that there are varying issues here.  For some 
environments, especially those that allow "htmlers" (which we all are) to 
dink with backend code, jsp probably is not the best solution.  For other 
environments, it is a boon.

At 01:21 AM 10/8/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>On 8/10/02 1:13, "dion@multitask.com.au" <di...@multitask.com.au> wrote:
>
> > And to resurface the old issue, this is so much worse than
> >
> > #if (..)
> > #end
> >
> > in Velocity...?
>
>I believe that Andy doesn't quite know what "templates" are ! :-) Dude,
>we're not talking about the beauty of XML around here, but stuff that
>Macromedia DreamWeaver can parse and (somehow) render! :-)
>
>Definitely "templating" is not an elegant approach, but it works. At least
>Tea and Velocity are not "compiled" straight into Java Code (therefore
>killing all HTMLers who thought they can "code" in Java, but in fact only
>producing tons of OutOfMemoryExceptions).
>
>More than "separation of concerns" using something better compared to JSP is
>a headache wonder (go and try to figure out where an OutOfMemoryException
>comes from, just to discover that in one of your 5000 JSPs you have an idiot
>playing around with Sessions, or why your database is hosed, and find out
>that some other lame creep is forgetting to call "connection.close()"...
>Arrrggghh)...
>
>JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
>obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
>less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
>
>     Pier
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

Nope.  That sucks too.  Not that my opinion should matter.

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 20:13, dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> And to resurface the old issue, this is so much worse than
> 
> #if (..)
> #end
> 
> in Velocity...?
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
> Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
> 
> 
> "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote on 08/10/2002 09:50:15 AM:
> 
> > Right...my problem with JSP isn't its dogged speed its the conceptual
> > nastiness of it.
> > 
> > <% 
> > if (you.have(this).in.your(html)) {
> >    out.println("Andy doesn't think its good");
> > } 
> > %>
> > 
> > -Andy
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 19:45, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > > On 8/10/02 0:18, "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Looks like kind of a mickey mouse version of JSP to me...  ;-) (I 
> just
> > > > couldn't resist...I just couldn't!)
> > > 
> > > It is, actually, but more than Mickey Mouse, it's the "Speedy 
> Gonzales"
> > > version of JSP, given that per equivalent template (and rewriting tag
> > > libraries in Tea Applications), we kinda get a 3x performance boost! 
> :-)
> > > 
> > > Plus it has its own editor, Kettle, (kinda Goofy, but far from being a 
> cheap
> > > Scrooge version of an IDE), and it's BSD (thanks to our Brian "Donald"
> > > Behlendorf who lured them into believing that Open Source is a "good
> > > thing").
> > > 
> > >     Quack
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > 
> > -- 
> > http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
> > http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
> > Java 
> > http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
> > structure
> >           a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
> > The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
> > vote.
> > -Ambassador Kosh
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

Actually, yes. 

Here is the specific reason(s):

http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/ymtd/ymtd-saying-hello.html

Most specifically, if you want to make the word "doesn't" in the example
below bold...now, you have embedded HTML into your println...and we know it
isn't MVC to embed HTML into Java code, right?

#if ($foo)
  Andy <b>doesn't</b> think its good
#end

Of course I wrote the YMTD document so that we don't have to have these same
discussions over and over again.

-jon

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/

on 2002/10/7 5:13 PM, "dion@multitask.com.au" <di...@multitask.com.au> wrote:

> And to resurface the old issue, this is so much worse than
> 
> #if (..)
> #end
> 
> in Velocity...?
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
> Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
> 
> 
> "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote on 08/10/2002 09:50:15 AM:
> 
>> Right...my problem with JSP isn't its dogged speed its the conceptual
>> nastiness of it.
>> 
>> <% 
>> if (you.have(this).in.your(html)) {
>>    out.println("Andy doesn't think its good");
>> }
>> %>
>> 
>> -Andy


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "V. Cekvenich" <vi...@users.sourceforge.net>.

(fun tread: tea, tapestry, no one said the other one 
http://www.salmonllc.com/website/Jsp/vanity/Jade.jsp )

This presentation/vie layer stuff is a popular topic.

Rumor is that JSR 127 (JS Faces) could allow for emitting of 
http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/ and do all rendering on browser via 
JavaScript, if I understood right, thus of loading processing, but there 
is a spec to interpret, you know where.

In case you missed it.:
I write to say perhaps you would want to *see
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/community/chat/
today*, I think 2PM eastern?
Very famous speaker ... and you can ask questions.

I wish there was an open source implementation of such components.... 
wait, what an idea?
I will try for something on sourceforge soon, maybe wait for ea 3.

hth,

.V

ps: somewhat related, but not a great implementations and not standard: 
http://demo.vultus.com, http://www.iternum.com/i3test/index.jsp, 
http://www.droplets.com)




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Brian Ewins <Br...@i-documentsystems.com>.

Pier Fumagalli wrote:

>I believe that Andy doesn't quite know what "templates" are ! :-) Dude,
>we're not talking about the beauty of XML around here, but stuff that
>Macromedia DreamWeaver can parse and (somehow) render! :-)
>
In my shop we've gone our own way, with our own templating sytem 
targetting Dreamweaver users specifically. Its been our experience that 
web designers shouldn't write jsps, but that servlet writers should, 
because it makes their html errors easier to fix. So, for the last year 
we'd automated conversion of the static mockups the web designers do 
into jsps using the struts taglibs, with hooks to allow replacement of 
links to static pages by links to struts actions, and so on. Active 
portions of the pages were developed as jsp's that got included by the 
struts template library (we identified replaceable chunks using id 
attributes, similarly to xmlc). The code to do this was written in house 
as an ant task, and took about 10 man days.

Over the course of time the amount of static content has come to 
dominate and the speed of the jsps had become an issue. We originally 
converted to jsps because it would allow the developers to fix up any 
conversion problems quickly, but in fact this rarely if ever happened. 
Also, we didn't make enough use of the fact that the web designers 
developed using their own templating system (the .dwt/.lbi sytem in 
dreamweaver). So now we're doing the same static-dynamic conversion on 
the fly, replacing DreamWeaver's .dwt template #BeginEditable... and 
#BeginLibraryItem... sections instead of the id-attributed elements we 
used before. The whole thing is now data-driven rather than compiled, 
and is much faster than the old jsps. The java developers do the rump of 
the code that needs to be dynamic, using the same included jsps; but 
there are far, far fewer jsps in the sites now - 125 instead of 1154 in 
one of them. Its much faster than the jsps, and has taken all of the 
static content out of the webapp.

I've never been that happy with templating languages - they just seem to 
shift the problem from html-in-code to code-in-html. By using struts and 
driving the look from a static site we have very little of either. The 
closest things to what we're doing I could find were xmlc and 
jdynamite[1].  xmlc was a no-go area for us because of its use of jtidy 
- the html emitted is not the html you put in; and our approach needed 
less coding than jdynamite, partly since the chunks we replace with 
dynamic code are quite coarse. I've tried the xml/xsl-based site thing 
too, in another company - it made some sense there because they had wml 
and webtv sites on top of the html ones (25 sites in all, all based off 
the same content). However it was dog slow (the xalan compiler wasn't 
out yet) and there aren't enough folk competent in xsl to maintain stuff 
like that.

Its horses for courses though. We have a marketing-driven website, with 
a lot of mainly-static content, which needs to be reskinned for 
deployment with many customers.  On the other hand we also develop an 
intranet application - which is essentially a standard GUI app but 
deployed over the web - where something like Tapestry would be more 
appropriate, as the developers are much more involved in the GUI.

-Baz

[1]http://jdynamite.sourceforge.net/doc/jdynamite_sf.html

Privacy and Confidentiality Notice

------------------------------------------------

The information contained in this E-Mail message is intended only for the person or persons to whom it is addressed.  Such information is confidential and privileged and no mistake in transmission is intended to waive or compromise such privilege.  If you have received it in error, please destroy it and notify us on the telephone number printed above.  If you do not receive complete and legible copies, please telephone us immediately. Any opinions expressed herein including attachments are those of the author only. i-documentsystems Ltd. does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information provided or for any changes to this Email, however made, after it was sent. (Please note that it is your responsibility to scan this message for viruses).

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.

Daniel Rall wrote:
> Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org> writes:
> 
> 
>>Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>>
>>>On 8/10/02 1:30 am, "Jon Scott Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>>on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
>>>>>obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
>>>>>less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
>>>>
>>>>It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)
>>>
>>>I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using XML, but
>>>the
>>
>>>world is too stupid to understand that... All everyone wants is a quick and
>>>dirty solution...
>>
>>Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss that
>>a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that it would
>>be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.  He told me
>>that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the right choice,
>>so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking me twice as long to
>>get it done.
> 
> 
> Depending on the situation, my response to something like that is my
> way or the highway.

Funny, that was the tack that my manager gave me... ;P

BTW, I took the highway and I need a job...  (actually they went broke,
but the result is the same).

-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.

Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org> writes:

> Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > On 8/10/02 1:30 am, "Jon Scott Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
> >
> 
> >>on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
> >>>obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
> >>>less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
> >>
> >>It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)
> > I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using XML, but
> > the
> 
> > world is too stupid to understand that... All everyone wants is a quick and
> > dirty solution...
> 
> Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss that
> a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that it would
> be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.  He told me
> that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the right choice,
> so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking me twice as long to
> get it done.

Depending on the situation, my response to something like that is my
way or the highway.
-- 

Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

Just goes to show you.  A sad comment on software development:  The only
thing worse than our still crappy tools for doing things are our crappy
methods of doing them.

-Andy

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 10:38, Steve Downey wrote:
> >From Scott Adams
> Wally: I recommedend we build a tracking database.
> Dilbert: We could put it on the network!
> PHB: Wouldn't you like to know what the problem is first?
> Dilbert: We like databases.
> 
> Databases get used in lots of wrongheaded ways. No argument. 
> But OO people tend to fall into the other trap, treating the database as a 
> 'persistance mechanism'. Then ending up with tons of objects with no behavior 
> other than being able to persist and reify themselves from a datastore. And 
> blaming the database because it's not great at that. 
> 
> On Thursday 10 October 2002 08:00 am, Tom Copeland wrote:
> > Since we're OT already, I have to interject a good Jamie Zawinski
> > database quote:
> >
> > ===========
> > It was a hard sell, since he's a database person, and as far as I've
> > seen, once those database worms eat into your brain, it's hard to ever
> > get anything practical done again. To a database person, every nail
> > looks like a thumb. Or something like that.
> > ===========
> >
> > tom
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steve Downey [mailto:steve.downey@netfolio.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
> > To: Jakarta General List
> > Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
> >
> > On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > > On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <bl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss
> >
> > that
> >
> > > > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that
> >
> > it
> >
> > > > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.
> >
> > He
> >
> > > > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > > > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking
> >
> > me
> >
> > > > twice as long to get it done.
> > >
> > > I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about
> >
> > Objects in
> >
> > > PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
> >
> > Objects in PL-SQL.
> >
> > I still have nightmares.
> >
> > SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive.
> >
> > <shudder>
> >
> > And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the
> > snail/cheetah <=>
> > Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant
> > regarding
> > the relational model.
> >
> > >     Pier
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Steve Downey <st...@netfolio.com>.

From Scott Adams
Wally: I recommedend we build a tracking database.
Dilbert: We could put it on the network!
PHB: Wouldn't you like to know what the problem is first?
Dilbert: We like databases.

Databases get used in lots of wrongheaded ways. No argument. 
But OO people tend to fall into the other trap, treating the database as a 
'persistance mechanism'. Then ending up with tons of objects with no behavior 
other than being able to persist and reify themselves from a datastore. And 
blaming the database because it's not great at that. 

On Thursday 10 October 2002 08:00 am, Tom Copeland wrote:
> Since we're OT already, I have to interject a good Jamie Zawinski
> database quote:
>
> ===========
> It was a hard sell, since he's a database person, and as far as I've
> seen, once those database worms eat into your brain, it's hard to ever
> get anything practical done again. To a database person, every nail
> looks like a thumb. Or something like that.
> ===========
>
> tom
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Downey [mailto:steve.downey@netfolio.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
> To: Jakarta General List
> Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
>
> On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <bl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss
>
> that
>
> > > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that
>
> it
>
> > > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.
>
> He
>
> > > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking
>
> me
>
> > > twice as long to get it done.
> >
> > I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about
>
> Objects in
>
> > PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
>
> Objects in PL-SQL.
>
> I still have nightmares.
>
> SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive.
>
> <shudder>
>
> And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the
> snail/cheetah <=>
> Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant
> regarding
> the relational model.
>
> >     Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

RE: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Tom Copeland <to...@infoether.com>.

Since we're OT already, I have to interject a good Jamie Zawinski
database quote:

===========
It was a hard sell, since he's a database person, and as far as I've
seen, once those database worms eat into your brain, it's hard to ever
get anything practical done again. To a database person, every nail
looks like a thumb. Or something like that. 
===========

tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Downey [mailto:steve.downey@netfolio.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <bl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss
that
> > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that
it
> > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.
He
> > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking
me
> > twice as long to get it done.
>
> I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about
Objects in
> PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
>
Objects in PL-SQL. 

I still have nightmares. 

SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive. 

<shudder>

And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the
snail/cheetah <=> 
Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant
regarding 
the relational model.

>     Pier

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Steve Downey <st...@netfolio.com>.

On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <bl...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss that
> > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that it
> > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.  He
> > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking me
> > twice as long to get it done.
>
> I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about Objects in
> PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
>
Objects in PL-SQL. 

I still have nightmares. 

SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive. 

<shudder>

And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the snail/cheetah <=> 
Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant regarding 
the relational model.

>     Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <bl...@apache.org> wrote:

> Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss that
> a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that it would
> be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.  He told me
> that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the right choice,
> so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking me twice as long to
> get it done.

I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about Objects in
PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)

    Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.

Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 8/10/02 1:30 am, "Jon Scott Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
>>>obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
>>>less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
>>
>>It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)
> 
> 
> I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using XML, but the
> world is too stupid to understand that... All everyone wants is a quick and
> dirty solution...

Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss that
a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that it would
be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.  He told me
that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the right choice,
so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking me twice as long to
get it done.


-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.

On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 00:14, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Possibly Avalon does this (to some degree) but it
> only covers a subset of what you need and furthermore it goes out of its
> way to define far to many "is a" relationships just to avoid having
> "default" implementations (public void init() {/*empty designated by
> interface}).  The cost is often a design with too many
> SameThingAsBOnlyIsAlsoComposableButNotConfigrable type classes... plus
> long inheritance trees to aggregate them all together..  

I think you will find most (all?) Avalon people hate deep inheritance (kinda 
obvious given that it is a component framework) so whoever has this sort of 
behaviour is misusing Avalon.

-- 
Cheers,

Peter Donald
"The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit." -- Maugham 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by micael <ca...@harbornet.com>.

Bingo!

At 10:55 AM 10/8/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Its too bad that the clans don't play nice together...  I'm convinced
>together... They could come up with something MUCH MUCH better than this
>mess. (provided some GUI wonks could be found) ;-)
>
>(and there is my theme) ;-)
>
>-Andy
>
>
>On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 10:42, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > So putting out crap code that you have to toggle and mess with over and
> > > over again is where the money is at in web app development.  So what is
> > > the solution?  There isn't one...web app development is still a big
> > > hairy mess.  Choice is good. ;-)
> >
> > Well put, not only this last part, but the whole...
> >
> > True, XML is a good approach from a technical point of view, but unusable
> > from some others (don't ask me to teach XSLT to our web guys, please!).
> >
> > JSPs can work for some, but they definitely introduce drawbacks when
> > thinking how they are implemented (they destroy my servlet container).
> >
> > Velocity is simple, doesn't mess around with my servlets, but it's
> > interpreted.
> >
> > Tea is fast, quite easy, but again the syntax is bad...
> >
> > There is _no_optimal_ solution... Just the one that works for you...
> >
> >     Pier
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>--
>http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
>http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
>Java
>http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
>structure
>                     a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex 
> Projects!
>The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
>vote.
>-Ambassador Kosh
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

Its too bad that the clans don't play nice together...  I'm convinced
together... They could come up with something MUCH MUCH better than this
mess. (provided some GUI wonks could be found) ;-)

(and there is my theme) ;-)

-Andy


On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 10:42, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > So putting out crap code that you have to toggle and mess with over and
> > over again is where the money is at in web app development.  So what is
> > the solution?  There isn't one...web app development is still a big
> > hairy mess.  Choice is good. ;-)
> 
> Well put, not only this last part, but the whole...
> 
> True, XML is a good approach from a technical point of view, but unusable
> from some others (don't ask me to teach XSLT to our web guys, please!).
> 
> JSPs can work for some, but they definitely introduce drawbacks when
> thinking how they are implemented (they destroy my servlet container).
> 
> Velocity is simple, doesn't mess around with my servlets, but it's
> interpreted.
> 
> Tea is fast, quite easy, but again the syntax is bad...
> 
> There is _no_optimal_ solution... Just the one that works for you...
> 
>     Pier
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.

Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org> writes:

> JSPs can work for some, but they definitely introduce drawbacks when
> thinking how they are implemented (they destroy my servlet container).
> 
> Velocity is simple, doesn't mess around with my servlets, but it's
> interpreted.
> 
> Tea is fast, quite easy, but again the syntax is bad...
> 
> There is _no_optimal_ solution... Just the one that works for you...

Indeed!

Gotta point out that Velocity can and should be configured to cache
the AST which its JavaCC-based parser creates from your template,
making it slightly faster than JSP.

Also, isn't Tea strongly typed?  Depending on your point of view, you
might consider than an advantage over loosely-typed templating
systems.
-- 

Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/8 8:41 AM, "Geir Magnusson Jr" <ge...@adeptra.com> wrote:

> That's why Velocity is as fast as JSP.
> 
> geir

...if not faster...

-jon

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@adeptra.com>.

On 10/8/02 10:42 AM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:

> "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> So putting out crap code that you have to toggle and mess with over and
>> over again is where the money is at in web app development.  So what is
>> the solution?  There isn't one...web app development is still a big
>> hairy mess.  Choice is good. ;-)
> 
> Well put, not only this last part, but the whole...
> 
> True, XML is a good approach from a technical point of view, but unusable
> from some others (don't ask me to teach XSLT to our web guys, please!).
> 
> JSPs can work for some, but they definitely introduce drawbacks when
> thinking how they are implemented (they destroy my servlet container).
> 
> Velocity is simple, doesn't mess around with my servlets, but it's
> interpreted.
> 

That's like saying JSP is interpreted.

When a Velocity template is parsed, it's turned into a graph of objects and
that graph is cached, so execution is simply method calls on objects held as
references within that graph.  That's why Velocity is as fast as JSP.

geir

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. 
geirm@adeptra.com                                    +1-203-355-2219 (w)
Adeptra Inc.                                         +1-203-247-1713 (m)



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

"Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:

> So putting out crap code that you have to toggle and mess with over and
> over again is where the money is at in web app development.  So what is
> the solution?  There isn't one...web app development is still a big
> hairy mess.  Choice is good. ;-)

Well put, not only this last part, but the whole...

True, XML is a good approach from a technical point of view, but unusable
from some others (don't ask me to teach XSLT to our web guys, please!).

JSPs can work for some, but they definitely introduce drawbacks when
thinking how they are implemented (they destroy my servlet container).

Velocity is simple, doesn't mess around with my servlets, but it's
interpreted.

Tea is fast, quite easy, but again the syntax is bad...

There is _no_optimal_ solution... Just the one that works for you...

    Pier

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

I both agree and disagree with you.  The trouble is that XSLT syntax is
horrific and some of the specs (for a specific example the XInclude
spec) are bent on violating SoC more than embedding if statements ever
could (having to declare a base url is a greater evil).

There is a "production concern" that I keep hearing over and over about
how to let the art-crowd work on the HTML.  And I think a better XML
solution combined with better tools could solve that. Unfortunately it
is unlikely that these will be developed in a recession, and while I
have some ideas on how this would be done, I hate GUI programming.

The trick is to divide your stylesheet out to include content from an
XHTML template with marker nodes which are basically ignored by the
WYSIWIG editor (btw I'm not arguing that such tools are good...I've yet
to find one that doesn't produce crap code).  The WYSIWIG edits this
"template" which is included by the stylesheet.  Your data passes
through the stylesheet, the template has nodes included, and your "web
designer" doesn't have to learn HTML (ha ha).

The other challenge is that HTML just sucks totally... (I figure while
I'm slaughtering the sacred cows I might as well get out the Gatling gun
and kill the lead cow of them all)..  However...I think we're stuck with
it for quite some time.

The anti-pattern to this is that it takes forever to get an XSLT page
right...  Don't get me wrong... I like XSLT and I think is the "right"
solution (minus its crappy syntax), but its a forethought versus an
afterthought technology.  Meaning you pay up front.  Business hates
this, they'd rather think only about the present, get it out
quickly...then pay all along over and over again.  (The logic defies me
but I hold this truth to be self-evident).  

The other anti-pattern is that XML is a hodgepodge of X* stuff and JAX*
stuff.  No cohesive architecture to any of the various X*/JAX* stuff. 
And working with others in XML stuff is awful!  "I like and want to use
SAX, no I like JDOM, but I want to pass you JDOM objects...but I need
DOM objects..." (and don't even get me started on XML jar version hell).

What JSP/Struts and Velocity/and friends give you is a bit more of a
cohesive architecture.  What they don't give you is an elegant way to
separate concerns. Possibly Avalon does this (to some degree) but it
only covers a subset of what you need and furthermore it goes out of its
way to define far to many "is a" relationships just to avoid having
"default" implementations (public void init() {/*empty designated by
interface}).  The cost is often a design with too many
SameThingAsBOnlyIsAlsoComposableButNotConfigrable type classes... plus
long inheritance trees to aggregate them all together..  And at the
end...you still don't have a way to stick stuff in your HTML or stick
HTML around your stuff.  

So putting out crap code that you have to toggle and mess with over and
over again is where the money is at in web app development.  So what is
the solution?  There isn't one...web app development is still a big
hairy mess.  Choice is good. ;-)

-Andy

On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 04:04, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 8/10/02 1:30 am, "Jon Scott Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
> 
> > on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
> >> obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
> >> less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
> > 
> > It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)
> 
> I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using XML, but the
> world is too stupid to understand that... All everyone wants is a quick and
> dirty solution...
> 
>     Pier
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Endre Stølsvik <En...@Stolsvik.com>.

On 8 Oct 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:

| This is a sucky thing about java.  You get a JVM always whether you want
| one or not.. to do it in java he needs a mod_java with GCJ.  (That
| actually sounds kinda cool)

An old message, but hey..

Have you checked out JSR 121 - "Application Isolation API Specification"?
[http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=121] - Public Review phase right now...

Looks simple, easy and very important - finally the Java can be used as a
operating system..


-- 
Mvh,
Endre Stølsvik               M[+47 93054050] F[+47 51625182]
Developer @ CoreTrek AS         -  http://www.coretrek.com/
CoreTrek corporate portal / EIP -  http://www.corelets.com/



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

I disagree with such Java Jingoism.  Jon's reasoning sounded pretty good
to me. . Launching several JVMs sucks.  And doing all in one is a recipe
for disaster...  (crash bang boom)

This is a sucky thing about java.  You get a JVM always whether you want
one or not.. to do it in java he needs a mod_java with GCJ.  (That
actually sounds kinda cool)

-Andy

On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 18:39, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> At 12:07 08.10.2002 -0700, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
> 
> >I recently spent a couple weekend nights and built the StudioZ.tv website in
> >PHP4 on OSX. It is a pretty cool webapp that has really transformed things
> >for us and made my life MUCH easier (the office staff can fully manage the
> >events that show up on the website via a browser). I incorporate several
> >technologies into the site (including a cool XML-RPC interface that talks to
> >presaleticketing.com to tell us how many tickets have been sold). I used PHP
> >because it was quick and easy and I didn't have time to 'design' the
> >application.
> >
> >The only thing that sucks is that the code is a complete hack that is going
> >to be terrible to maintain over the long term and half the time, I can't
> >figure out why something does or doesn't work.
> 
> It is surprising that a Java expert with monumental contributions to
> this community would not use Java technology to create his website. Is
> this a case of "do as I say, not as I do"?
> 
> Of course one is free to try new approaches but the anecdote is still quite
> telling. Cool-looking site by the way.
> 
> >=)
> >
> >-jon
> >
> >--
> >StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
> >314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
> >         http://studioz.tv/
> 
> --
> Ceki
> 
> TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be
> conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from
> others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.

It'd be a piece of cake to add a velocity tag to Jelly....
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers


dlr@finemaltcoding.com wrote on 11/10/2002 05:22:30 AM:

> dion@multitask.com.au writes:
> 
> > dlr@finemaltcoding.com wrote on 10/10/2002 03:40:35 AM:
> > 
> > > Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > Java is not the fastest technology to develop in, however, it 
produces 
> > the
> > > > best code for the long term.
> > > > 
> > > > PHP is the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces 
the
> > > > crappiest code for the long term.
> > > 
> > > mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
> > > clever balance between the two.
> > > 
> > > > XML IS NOT A PROGAMMING LANGUAGE.
> > > 
> > > For certain!  This is one of my biggest issues with Ant and
> > > Jelly/Maven -- working with them is just ... icky.
> > 
> > So use the script tag in Ant/Jelly.....
> 
> Don't I then have to rely on an external scripting system -- Jython,
> for instance?
> -- 
> 
> Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.

dion@multitask.com.au writes:

> dlr@finemaltcoding.com wrote on 10/10/2002 03:40:35 AM:
> 
> > Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:
> > 
> > > Java is not the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces 
> the
> > > best code for the long term.
> > > 
> > > PHP is the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
> > > crappiest code for the long term.
> > 
> > mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
> > clever balance between the two.
> > 
> > > XML IS NOT A PROGAMMING LANGUAGE.
> > 
> > For certain!  This is one of my biggest issues with Ant and
> > Jelly/Maven -- working with them is just ... icky.
> 
> So use the script tag in Ant/Jelly.....

Don't I then have to rely on an external scripting system -- Jython,
for instance?
-- 

Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.

dlr@finemaltcoding.com wrote on 10/10/2002 03:40:35 AM:

> Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:
> 
> > Java is not the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces 
the
> > best code for the long term.
> > 
> > PHP is the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
> > crappiest code for the long term.
> 
> mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
> clever balance between the two.
> 
> > XML IS NOT A PROGAMMING LANGUAGE.
> 
> For certain!  This is one of my biggest issues with Ant and
> Jelly/Maven -- working with them is just ... icky.

So use the script tag in Ant/Jelly.....

--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.

Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:

> on 2002/10/9 10:40 AM, "Daniel Rall" <dl...@finemaltcoding.com> wrote:
> 
> > mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
> > clever balance between the two.
> 
> Not really. This is about as good as plain servlets.
> 
> http://www.modpython.org/live/mod_python-2.7.8/doc-html/tut-pub.html

The action invocation system reminds me of Turbine, actually.  ;-)

Using Apache's module API and soemthing to take care of sessions (I
assume that mod_python provides something of the kind), you have a
light-weight app server ready to go.

> Notice the HTML embedded in the .py file? There really isn't anything
> different between that and a servlet and isn't python slower than Java
> anyway? So, now we just go down the path of re-implementing everything we
> have spent years implementing in Java...I don't see the gain.

Greg Stein's EZT or the Cheetah template system that James pointed out
could be used in place of that inline crap.

...
> -jon (who thinks Daniel is bitten by the python bug =) )

Yes, Python is excellent.
-- 

Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by James Taylor <jt...@4lane.com>.

On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 14:05, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
> on 2002/10/9 10:40 AM, "Daniel Rall" <dl...@finemaltcoding.com> wrote:
> 
> > mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
> > clever balance between the two.
> 
> Not really. This is about as good as plain servlets.
> 
> http://www.modpython.org/live/mod_python-2.7.8/doc-html/tut-pub.html
> 
> Notice the HTML embedded in the .py file? There really isn't anything
> different between that and a servlet and isn't python slower than Java
> anyway? So, now we just go down the path of re-implementing everything we
> have spent years implementing in Java...I don't see the gain.

For apples to apples:

http://webware.sourceforge.net/
http://www.cheetahtemplate.org/

( God knows why they went with a syntax almost but not quite exactly
like velocity, but it is still pretty nice stuff )
 
> +1 for python as a replacement for Perl scripts
> -0 for python as a replacement for Servlets
> 
> =)
> 
> -jon (who thinks Daniel is bitten by the python bug =) )
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/9 10:40 AM, "Daniel Rall" <dl...@finemaltcoding.com> wrote:

> mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
> clever balance between the two.

Not really. This is about as good as plain servlets.

http://www.modpython.org/live/mod_python-2.7.8/doc-html/tut-pub.html

Notice the HTML embedded in the .py file? There really isn't anything
different between that and a servlet and isn't python slower than Java
anyway? So, now we just go down the path of re-implementing everything we
have spent years implementing in Java...I don't see the gain.

+1 for python as a replacement for Perl scripts
-0 for python as a replacement for Servlets

=)

-jon (who thinks Daniel is bitten by the python bug =) )

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.

Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:

> Java is not the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
> best code for the long term.
> 
> PHP is the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
> crappiest code for the long term.

mod_python is looking more and more attractive to me all the time, a
clever balance between the two.

> XML IS NOT A PROGAMMING LANGUAGE.

For certain!  This is one of my biggest issues with Ant and
Jelly/Maven -- working with them is just ... icky.
-- 

Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 8/10/02 23:59, "Jon Scott Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:

> Java is not the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
> best code for the long term.
> 
> PHP is the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
> crappiest code for the long term.

The problem is when you see people using Java as PHP... That _really_ screws
things up... Want some few megs of classes as an example? Nah, you'll hack
in my employer's site in less than 10 minutes! :-)

    Pier

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/8 3:39 PM, "Ceki Gülcü" <ce...@qos.ch> wrote:

> It is surprising that a Java expert with monumental contributions to
> this community would not use Java technology to create his website. Is
> this a case of "do as I say, not as I do"?
> 
> Of course one is free to try new approaches but the anecdote is still quite
> telling.

Java is not the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
best code for the long term.

PHP is the fastest technology to develop in, however, it produces the
crappiest code for the long term.

I develop Scarab in Java because it is going to live far longer than I do
and needs a solid base to work from.

I develop my bar's website in PHP because I just needed to get the job done
quickly and was not concerned with code quality.

I could have used JSP to develop the site and considered that for about 2
seconds and then puked. I would use ASP or PHP LONG before I would even go
there with JSP. Personally, I think taglibs are stupid. XML IS NOT A
PROGAMMING LANGUAGE.

> Cool-looking site by the way.

Thanks! And you can only see a small portion of it since the rest is
protected by login. =)

-jon

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Ceki Gülcü <ce...@qos.ch>.

At 12:07 08.10.2002 -0700, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:

>I recently spent a couple weekend nights and built the StudioZ.tv website in
>PHP4 on OSX. It is a pretty cool webapp that has really transformed things
>for us and made my life MUCH easier (the office staff can fully manage the
>events that show up on the website via a browser). I incorporate several
>technologies into the site (including a cool XML-RPC interface that talks to
>presaleticketing.com to tell us how many tickets have been sold). I used PHP
>because it was quick and easy and I didn't have time to 'design' the
>application.
>
>The only thing that sucks is that the code is a complete hack that is going
>to be terrible to maintain over the long term and half the time, I can't
>figure out why something does or doesn't work.

It is surprising that a Java expert with monumental contributions to
this community would not use Java technology to create his website. Is
this a case of "do as I say, not as I do"?

Of course one is free to try new approaches but the anecdote is still quite
telling. Cool-looking site by the way.

>=)
>
>-jon
>
>--
>StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
>314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
>         http://studioz.tv/

--
Ceki

TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be
conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from
others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jeff Schnitzer <je...@infohazard.org>.

On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 03:03:37PM -0700, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
> 
> Interestingly enough, I did write a quick little framework that works very
> similar to Turbine and has the same concept of users/roles/permissions. =)

Well, if you want an MVC framework, someone did a port
of Maverick to PHP:   http://amb.sourceforge.net/

:-P

Jeff Schnitzer
jeff@infohazard.org

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

Ever read/see Village of the Dammed? ;-)

-Andy

On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 19:49, Daniel Rall wrote:
> Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:
> 
> > Actually, it looks like CollabNet's SourceCast. Scarab looks like SourceCast
> > and Maven looks like Scarab. =)
> 
> And you can all look like each other!
> 
> http://style.tigris.org/
> -- 
> 
> Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.

Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> writes:

> Actually, it looks like CollabNet's SourceCast. Scarab looks like SourceCast
> and Maven looks like Scarab. =)

And you can all look like each other!

http://style.tigris.org/
-- 

Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/8 2:32 PM, "Leo Simons" <le...@apache.org> wrote:

>> I recently spent a couple weekend nights and built the
>> StudioZ.tv website in PHP4 on OSX.
> 
> Hey, that looks like maven! :P

Actually, it looks like CollabNet's SourceCast. Scarab looks like SourceCast
and Maven looks like Scarab. =)

> We use PHP all the time (I sometimes call it "InstantCMS") and
> it is a great tool for whacking up a dynamic website. It's just
> that creating enterprise SOAP services in it that talk to oracle
> on one side and delphi clients on the other is painful. Or
> running a site with like 10,000,000 articles and as many
> visitors/day.

It is more than that though...it is about long term code design and
maintainability. My pages are FULL of code...that is just evil. Even worse
is that there is no way around that unless I use a template system within
PHP! Yuck!

If I want to have a central repo of functions and classes to use, I have to
include the entire file just to get at one function (or embed each function
in a different file which sucks just as badly). Yuck!

If I want a database connection, I have to include a file to get it. Yuck.

Interestingly enough, I did write a quick little framework that works very
similar to Turbine and has the same concept of users/roles/permissions. =)

> There's several more things...I just always remember that PHP
> used to stand for Personal Home Page =)

Which is when I originally started using it (pre 1.0 days). =)

-jon

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

RE: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.

> I recently spent a couple weekend nights and built the 
> StudioZ.tv website in PHP4 on OSX.

Hey, that looks like maven! :P

> It is a pretty cool webapp 
> that has really transformed things for us and made my life 
> MUCH easier (the office staff can fully manage the events 
> that show up on the website via a browser). I incorporate 
> several technologies into the site (including a cool XML-RPC 
> interface that talks to presaleticketing.com to tell us how 
> many tickets have been sold). I used PHP because it was quick 
> and easy and I didn't have time to 'design' the application.

We use PHP all the time (I sometimes call it "InstantCMS") and
it is a great tool for whacking up a dynamic website. It's just
that creating enterprise SOAP services in it that talk to oracle
on one side and delphi clients on the other is painful. Or
running a site with like 10,000,000 articles and as many
visitors/day.

> The only thing that sucks is that the code is a complete hack 
> that is going to be terrible to maintain over the long term 
> and half the time, I can't figure out why something does or 
> doesn't work.
> 
> =)

There's several more things...I just always remember that PHP
used to stand for Personal Home Page =)

cheers,

Leo



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/8 2:42 AM, "Leo Simons" <le...@apache.org> wrote:

> "PHP 5 and MySQL 4 will make java, .Net, and all similar technologies
> obsolete."
> 
> Said one manager to another manager on a golf court, after having
> spent the weekend with his 12 year old son who built the school
> website.
> 
> It took me a week ton convince the "another manager" that it might
> not be a good idea to start building our SOAP services in PHP.
> 
>> I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using
>> XML, but the world is too stupid to understand that... All
>> everyone wants is a quick and dirty solution...
> 
> "Yeah, well, you can edit PHP pages in dreamweaver, and manage your
> MySQL databases with it too, all automatically, so who needs
> programmers anymore anyway?"
> 
> Says the 12 year old.
> 
> The world, stupid? Nah. "People would never choose a technically
> inferior VCR. We're going to win this."
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Leo

I recently spent a couple weekend nights and built the StudioZ.tv website in
PHP4 on OSX. It is a pretty cool webapp that has really transformed things
for us and made my life MUCH easier (the office staff can fully manage the
events that show up on the website via a browser). I incorporate several
technologies into the site (including a cool XML-RPC interface that talks to
presaleticketing.com to tell us how many tickets have been sold). I used PHP
because it was quick and easy and I didn't have time to 'design' the
application.

The only thing that sucks is that the code is a complete hack that is going
to be terrible to maintain over the long term and half the time, I can't
figure out why something does or doesn't work.

=)

-jon

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

RE: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.

"PHP 5 and MySQL 4 will make java, .Net, and all similar technologies
obsolete."

Said one manager to another manager on a golf court, after having
spent the weekend with his 12 year old son who built the school
website.

It took me a week ton convince the "another manager" that it might
not be a good idea to start building our SOAP services in PHP.

> I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using 
> XML, but the world is too stupid to understand that... All 
> everyone wants is a quick and dirty solution...

"Yeah, well, you can edit PHP pages in dreamweaver, and manage your
MySQL databases with it too, all automatically, so who needs
programmers anymore anyway?"

Says the 12 year old.

The world, stupid? Nah. "People would never choose a technically
inferior VCR. We're going to win this."

cheers,

Leo



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 8/10/02 1:30 am, "Jon Scott Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:

> on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:
> 
>> JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
>> obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
>> less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
> 
> It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)

I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using XML, but the
world is too stupid to understand that... All everyone wants is a quick and
dirty solution...

    Pier

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:

> JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
> obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
> less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...
> 
>   Pier

It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)

-jon

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 8/10/02 1:13, "dion@multitask.com.au" <di...@multitask.com.au> wrote:

> And to resurface the old issue, this is so much worse than
> 
> #if (..)
> #end
> 
> in Velocity...?

I believe that Andy doesn't quite know what "templates" are ! :-) Dude,
we're not talking about the beauty of XML around here, but stuff that
Macromedia DreamWeaver can parse and (somehow) render! :-)

Definitely "templating" is not an elegant approach, but it works. At least
Tea and Velocity are not "compiled" straight into Java Code (therefore
killing all HTMLers who thought they can "code" in Java, but in fact only
producing tons of OutOfMemoryExceptions).

More than "separation of concerns" using something better compared to JSP is
a headache wonder (go and try to figure out where an OutOfMemoryException
comes from, just to discover that in one of your 5000 JSPs you have an idiot
playing around with Sessions, or why your database is hosed, and find out
that some other lame creep is forgetting to call "connection.close()"...
Arrrggghh)...

JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...

    Pier

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.

Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au> wrote on 08/10/2002 10:12:33 AM:

> > From: dion@multitask.com.au
> > 
> > #if (..)
> > #end
> > 
> > in Velocity...?
> > 
> >> "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote on 08/10/2002 09:50:15 
AM:
> >> 
> >> <% 
> >> if (you.have(this).in.your(html)) {
> >>    out.println("Andy doesn't think its good");
> >> } 
> >> %>
> 
> But the Velocity is much easier to teach to a web designer 
(non-programmer)
> than the JSP.
> http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/ymtd/ymtd.html

I really shouldn't have replied before, but since i did....

we've been over this a million times before, and the ymtd document has 
some glaring inconsistencies I've pointed out years ago wrt the struts 
version of things. Using it as a prop in these arguments is a major 
woftam.

--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 8/10/02 1:12, "Scott Eade" <se...@backstagetech.com.au> wrote:

> But the Velocity is much easier to teach to a web designer (non-programmer)
> than the JSP.
> http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/ymtd/ymtd.html

More than easier to teach, is that it _forbids_ them to do what they're not
supposed to do... Code... Otherwise, where will I get my salary from? (Well,
I can still get it if I have to restart our main Servlet engine 5 times a
day, but boy, that's booooring).

BTW, <http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/ymtd/ymtd-hosting.html> should be
extended... It doesn't tell you all those sort of damages that a JSP can do
to your host environment...

    Pier

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au>.

> From: dion@multitask.com.au
> 
> #if (..)
> #end
> 
> in Velocity...?
> 
>> "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote on 08/10/2002 09:50:15 AM:
>> 
>> <% 
>> if (you.have(this).in.your(html)) {
>>    out.println("Andy doesn't think its good");
>> } 
>> %>

But the Velocity is much easier to teach to a web designer (non-programmer)
than the JSP.
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/ymtd/ymtd.html

Scott
-- 
Scott Eade
Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd.
http://www.backstagetech.com.au



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.

And to resurface the old issue, this is so much worse than

#if (..)
#end

in Velocity...?
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers


"Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote on 08/10/2002 09:50:15 AM:

> Right...my problem with JSP isn't its dogged speed its the conceptual
> nastiness of it.
> 
> <% 
> if (you.have(this).in.your(html)) {
>    out.println("Andy doesn't think its good");
> } 
> %>
> 
> -Andy
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 19:45, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > On 8/10/02 0:18, "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Looks like kind of a mickey mouse version of JSP to me...  ;-) (I 
just
> > > couldn't resist...I just couldn't!)
> > 
> > It is, actually, but more than Mickey Mouse, it's the "Speedy 
Gonzales"
> > version of JSP, given that per equivalent template (and rewriting tag
> > libraries in Tea Applications), we kinda get a 3x performance boost! 
:-)
> > 
> > Plus it has its own editor, Kettle, (kinda Goofy, but far from being a 
cheap
> > Scrooge version of an IDE), and it's BSD (thanks to our Brian "Donald"
> > Behlendorf who lured them into believing that Open Source is a "good
> > thing").
> > 
> >     Quack
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: 
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > 
> -- 
> http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
> http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
> Java 
> http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
> structure
>           a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
> The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
> vote.
> -Ambassador Kosh
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

Right...my problem with JSP isn't its dogged speed its the conceptual
nastiness of it.

<% 
if (you.have(this).in.your(html)) {
	out.println("Andy doesn't think its good");
} 
%>

-Andy
     

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 19:45, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 8/10/02 0:18, "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > Looks like kind of a mickey mouse version of JSP to me...  ;-) (I just
> > couldn't resist...I just couldn't!)
> 
> It is, actually, but more than Mickey Mouse, it's the "Speedy Gonzales"
> version of JSP, given that per equivalent template (and rewriting tag
> libraries in Tea Applications), we kinda get a 3x performance boost! :-)
> 
> Plus it has its own editor, Kettle, (kinda Goofy, but far from being a cheap
> Scrooge version of an IDE), and it's BSD (thanks to our Brian "Donald"
> Behlendorf who lured them into believing that Open Source is a "good
> thing").
> 
>     Quack
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Jon Scott Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.

on 2002/10/7 4:45 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:

> It is, actually, but more than Mickey Mouse, it's the "Speedy Gonzales"
> version of JSP, given that per equivalent template (and rewriting tag
> libraries in Tea Applications), we kinda get a 3x performance boost! :-)
> 
> Plus it has its own editor, Kettle, (kinda Goofy, but far from being a cheap
> Scrooge version of an IDE), and it's BSD (thanks to our Brian "Donald"
> Behlendorf who lured them into believing that Open Source is a "good
> thing").
> 
>   Quack

Tea is a great alternative to JSP if you are stuck with that mentality of
doing templates.

    Woof

-- 
StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment
314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco
        http://studioz.tv/


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 8/10/02 0:18, "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:

> Looks like kind of a mickey mouse version of JSP to me...  ;-) (I just
> couldn't resist...I just couldn't!)

It is, actually, but more than Mickey Mouse, it's the "Speedy Gonzales"
version of JSP, given that per equivalent template (and rewriting tag
libraries in Tea Applications), we kinda get a 3x performance boost! :-)

Plus it has its own editor, Kettle, (kinda Goofy, but far from being a cheap
Scrooge version of an IDE), and it's BSD (thanks to our Brian "Donald"
Behlendorf who lured them into believing that Open Source is a "good
thing").

    Quack

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

Looks like kind of a mickey mouse version of JSP to me...  ;-) (I just
couldn't resist...I just couldn't!)

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 18:08, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 7/10/02 22:01, "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > While I think there are places that struts could learn a lot from
> > turbine...  Struts has a bit more "design cohesion" shall we say?  Where
> > turbine is a bit more....organic in places.
> > 
> > The nice thing about Turbine is that it does favor containment over
> > inheritance, same thing with Struts (not necessarily so with Avalon +
> > friends).  The bad thing is that Turbine is all things to all people in
> > some ways..  
> > 
> > I think I kinda like Turbine better than Struts...but the verdict isn't
> > out yet.  (Bias:  I think JSP sucks equine hybrid reproductive
> > organs..correction...I think that about ASP... JSP I think of as ASP
> > with its father run off ;-) )
> 
> http://opensource.go.com/
> 
>     Pier
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.

On 7/10/02 22:01, "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:

> While I think there are places that struts could learn a lot from
> turbine...  Struts has a bit more "design cohesion" shall we say?  Where
> turbine is a bit more....organic in places.
> 
> The nice thing about Turbine is that it does favor containment over
> inheritance, same thing with Struts (not necessarily so with Avalon +
> friends).  The bad thing is that Turbine is all things to all people in
> some ways..  
> 
> I think I kinda like Turbine better than Struts...but the verdict isn't
> out yet.  (Bias:  I think JSP sucks equine hybrid reproductive
> organs..correction...I think that about ASP... JSP I think of as ASP
> with its father run off ;-) )

http://opensource.go.com/

    Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.

While I think there are places that struts could learn a lot from
turbine...  Struts has a bit more "design cohesion" shall we say?  Where
turbine is a bit more....organic in places.  

The nice thing about Turbine is that it does favor containment over
inheritance, same thing with Struts (not necessarily so with Avalon +
friends).  The bad thing is that Turbine is all things to all people in
some ways..  

I think I kinda like Turbine better than Struts...but the verdict isn't
out yet.  (Bias:  I think JSP sucks equine hybrid reproductive
organs..correction...I think that about ASP... JSP I think of as ASP
with its father run off ;-) )

-Andy

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 16:12, James Taylor wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 19:36, John McNally wrote:
> > This is not really the correct place, but a short answer is struts is
> > jsp-centric while turbine attempts to be neutral on the actual
> > templating mechanism.  Given that most jsp developers gravitate to
> > struts means you get the best support if using velocity within turbine. 
> > Struts most certainly has more users, but the turbine developer
> > community is healthy.  I'm pretty sure both will survive.
> 
> Healthy as in active, but not always mentally healthy. You will
> occasionally hear turbine developers muttering things like "the next
> version will support the struts action resolution mechanism" or "we need
> to support JSP as a first class templating option". It is at that point
> that you should run away.
> 
> > 
> > john mcnally
> > 
> > On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 11:08, Dominic Gagne wrote:
> > > I hope I'm asking the right mailing list ...  I'd like to know the
> > > differences between Struts and Turbine project. I'm currently using Turbine
> > > framework to build a web application and I see that Struts could offer me
> > > the same kind of solution, am I right ? I would also like to know which
> > > project in moving faster and has more chance the stay alive ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java                            
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
		    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by James Taylor <jt...@4lane.com>.

On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 19:36, John McNally wrote:
> This is not really the correct place, but a short answer is struts is
> jsp-centric while turbine attempts to be neutral on the actual
> templating mechanism.  Given that most jsp developers gravitate to
> struts means you get the best support if using velocity within turbine. 
> Struts most certainly has more users, but the turbine developer
> community is healthy.  I'm pretty sure both will survive.

Healthy as in active, but not always mentally healthy. You will
occasionally hear turbine developers muttering things like "the next
version will support the struts action resolution mechanism" or "we need
to support JSP as a first class templating option". It is at that point
that you should run away.

> 
> john mcnally
> 
> On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 11:08, Dominic Gagne wrote:
> > I hope I'm asking the right mailing list ...  I'd like to know the
> > differences between Struts and Turbine project. I'm currently using Turbine
> > framework to build a web application and I see that Struts could offer me
> > the same kind of solution, am I right ? I would also like to know which
> > project in moving faster and has more chance the stay alive ?




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

Posted by John McNally <jm...@collab.net>.

This is not really the correct place, but a short answer is struts is
jsp-centric while turbine attempts to be neutral on the actual
templating mechanism.  Given that most jsp developers gravitate to
struts means you get the best support if using velocity within turbine. 
Struts most certainly has more users, but the turbine developer
community is healthy.  I'm pretty sure both will survive.

john mcnally

On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 11:08, Dominic Gagne wrote:
> I hope I'm asking the right mailing list ...  I'd like to know the
> differences between Struts and Turbine project. I'm currently using Turbine
> framework to build a web application and I see that Struts could offer me
> the same kind of solution, am I right ? I would also like to know which
> project in moving faster and has more chance the stay alive ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Dominic
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>