You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by Vinicius Carvalho <ja...@gmail.com> on 2005/12/20 17:02:10 UTC
Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading and
checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn JSF, and It
made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that event that
annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name: navigation ... And
the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage anymore.
Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that implements
page? Those are only ideas ;)
Regards
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by Dan Adams <da...@ifactory.com>.
I worked with JSF before it was released up at Sun for about 6 months on
a rather large gui webapp and after working with tapestry 4 for a few
months I have to say that I agree. Tapestry rocks house like nobody's
business. I am still amazed at how much code you *don't* have to write
with Tapestry, especially compared to JSF.
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:02 -0200, Vinicius Carvalho wrote:
> I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading and
> checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn JSF, and It
> made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that event that
> annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name: navigation ... And
> the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
> One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
> controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage anymore.
> Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that implements
> page? Those are only ideas ;)
>
> Regards
--
Dan Adams
Software Engineer
Interactive Factory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by John Coleman <jo...@ntlworld.com>.
> > I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading and
> > checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn JSF, and
It
> > made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that event
that
> > annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name: navigation ...
And
> > the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
If we go the "new" JSP2/JSF route, what do we really gain? It seems to be a
cleaned up JSP+Struts, like Sun do EJB3 with POJOs now, was cribbed off
Hibernate. Sun are trend followers, not trend setters. I can see the appeal
for clients with a JSP base, but for new projects I'll push Tapestry every
time now. There is Facelets, which creates a component like environment for
JSF, but I can't imagine this being anywhere as good as Tapestry, and it's
not mature.
Problems with JSP are debugging it, and leaking of inapropriate code into
it. I suppose the new EL will help tidy it up a bit, but really it's
basically the same bad concept.
It's good to hear this feedback anyway, thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi <le...@dtqsoftware.com>.
Vinicius Carvalho wrote:
> I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading and
> checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn JSF, and It
> made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that event that
> annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name: navigation ... And
> the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
> One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
> controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage anymore.
> Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that implements
> page? Those are only ideas ;)
>
> Regards
>
>
Hey go ahead, join the discussion and help us with implementation! I'm
sure a lot of people would like that idea ;).
--
Ing. Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi
DTQ Software
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by Cosmin Bucur <co...@gmail.com>.
good to hear i didn't waste my time , in the begining , when i
ditched that jsf book for Kent's tutorials :)
On 12/20/05, Paul Cantrell <ca...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Agreed to those reasons. The good argument I see for breaking the
> inheritance requirement is that it would let one just instantiate a
> page object straight up, instead of having to worry about getting it
> from the cycle, clearing fields from previous requests, etc. The
> Tapestry lifecycle as it currently exists still has its moments of
> sheer confusion....
>
> FWIW, I also compared JSF & Tapestry for my current project, and went
> in with a bias toward JSF but chose Tapestry.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul
>
>
> On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:11 PM, Konstantin Ignatyev wrote:
>
> > Personally I do not see
> > much need to break the inheritance requirement.
> >
> > My reasons:
> > - there is inevitably will be a layer in the application that
> > will use some Tapestry and/or web specific things therefore placing
> > it in a Page class makes sense ;
> > - inconvenience of testing and necessity or simple desire to
> > instantiate Page class directly probably indicates that too much
> > logic is placed in the web/Tapestry specific layer. A little bit of
> > refactoring helps would make application more robust,
> > comprehensible and maintainable.
> >
> >
> >
> > Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote: That is the direction
> > I'm working towards for 4.1 ... breaking the
> > inheritance requirement.
> >
> > On 12/20/05, Vinicius Carvalho wrote:
> >> I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading
> >> and
> >> checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn
> >> JSF, and It
> >> made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that
> >> event that
> >> annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name:
> >> navigation ... And
> >> the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
> >> One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
> >> controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage
> >> anymore.
> >> Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that
> >> implements
> >> page? Those are only ideas ;)
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
> > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
> >
> > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Konstantin Ignatyev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > PS: If this is a typical day on planet earth, humans will add
> > fifteen million tons of carbon to the atmosphere, destroy 115
> > square miles of tropical rainforest, create seventy-two miles of
> > desert, eliminate between forty to one hundred species, erode
> > seventy-one million tons of topsoil, add 2,700 tons of CFCs to the
> > stratosphere, and increase their population by 263,000
> >
> > Bowers, C.A. The Culture of Denial: Why the Environmental
> > Movement Needs a Strategy for Reforming Universities and Public
> > Schools. New York: State University of New York Press, 1997: (4)
> > (5) (p.206)
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Piano music podcast: http://inthehands.com
> Other interesting stuff: http://innig.net
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by Paul Cantrell <ca...@pobox.com>.
Agreed to those reasons. The good argument I see for breaking the
inheritance requirement is that it would let one just instantiate a
page object straight up, instead of having to worry about getting it
from the cycle, clearing fields from previous requests, etc. The
Tapestry lifecycle as it currently exists still has its moments of
sheer confusion....
FWIW, I also compared JSF & Tapestry for my current project, and went
in with a bias toward JSF but chose Tapestry.
Cheers,
Paul
On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:11 PM, Konstantin Ignatyev wrote:
> Personally I do not see
> much need to break the inheritance requirement.
>
> My reasons:
> - there is inevitably will be a layer in the application that
> will use some Tapestry and/or web specific things therefore placing
> it in a Page class makes sense ;
> - inconvenience of testing and necessity or simple desire to
> instantiate Page class directly probably indicates that too much
> logic is placed in the web/Tapestry specific layer. A little bit of
> refactoring helps would make application more robust,
> comprehensible and maintainable.
>
>
>
> Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote: That is the direction
> I'm working towards for 4.1 ... breaking the
> inheritance requirement.
>
> On 12/20/05, Vinicius Carvalho wrote:
>> I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading
>> and
>> checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn
>> JSF, and It
>> made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that
>> event that
>> annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name:
>> navigation ... And
>> the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
>> One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
>> controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage
>> anymore.
>> Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that
>> implements
>> page? Those are only ideas ;)
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
> Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
>
> Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
> Konstantin Ignatyev
>
>
>
>
> PS: If this is a typical day on planet earth, humans will add
> fifteen million tons of carbon to the atmosphere, destroy 115
> square miles of tropical rainforest, create seventy-two miles of
> desert, eliminate between forty to one hundred species, erode
> seventy-one million tons of topsoil, add 2,700 tons of CFCs to the
> stratosphere, and increase their population by 263,000
>
> Bowers, C.A. The Culture of Denial: Why the Environmental
> Movement Needs a Strategy for Reforming Universities and Public
> Schools. New York: State University of New York Press, 1997: (4)
> (5) (p.206)
_________________________________________________________________
Piano music podcast: http://inthehands.com
Other interesting stuff: http://innig.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by Konstantin Ignatyev <kg...@yahoo.com>.
Personally I do not see much need to break the inheritance requirement.
My reasons:
- there is inevitably will be a layer in the application that will use some Tapestry and/or web specific things therefore placing it in a Page class makes sense ;
- inconvenience of testing and necessity or simple desire to instantiate Page class directly probably indicates that too much logic is placed in the web/Tapestry specific layer. A little bit of refactoring helps would make application more robust, comprehensible and maintainable.
Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote: That is the direction I'm working towards for 4.1 ... breaking the
inheritance requirement.
On 12/20/05, Vinicius Carvalho wrote:
> I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading and
> checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn JSF, and It
> made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that event that
> annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name: navigation ... And
> the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
> One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
> controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage anymore.
> Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that implements
> page? Those are only ideas ;)
>
> Regards
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Konstantin Ignatyev
PS: If this is a typical day on planet earth, humans will add fifteen million tons of carbon to the atmosphere, destroy 115 square miles of tropical rainforest, create seventy-two miles of desert, eliminate between forty to one hundred species, erode seventy-one million tons of topsoil, add 2,700 tons of CFCs to the stratosphere, and increase their population by 263,000
Bowers, C.A. The Culture of Denial: Why the Environmental Movement Needs a Strategy for Reforming Universities and Public Schools. New York: State University of New York Press, 1997: (4) (5) (p.206)
Re: Tried JSF ... Tapestry Rocks!!!
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
That is the direction I'm working towards for 4.1 ... breaking the
inheritance requirement.
On 12/20/05, Vinicius Carvalho <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was obligated to tyr JSF for real, so far I've been only reading and
> checking some demos. I've got in a project where I HAD to learn JSF, and It
> made me like Tapestry even more. JSF has such a Struts base that event that
> annoying mapping stuff is back but with a different name: navigation ... And
> the JSP looks like a salad of tags, petty.
> One thing I thought was cool, the idea of having any POJO being a
> controller. Could Tapestry have this one day? Not extend BasePage anymore.
> Couldn't it use dynamic bytecode enhancing to create a proxy that implements
> page? Those are only ideas ;)
>
> Regards
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org