Re: Re: Time out!
Re: Re: Time out!
- Subject: Re: Re: Time out!
- From: "Joe Little" <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:30 -0700
On 8/12/06, Chuck Hill <email@hidden> wrote:
Hi,
On Aug 12, 2006, at 1:45 PM, Deepak Nulu wrote:
> I use Eclipse at work, and I think it is one of the best (if not
> the best) IDEs for Java. The new functionality that I see in each
> new release makes me smile just the way the new innovative user-
> interfaces developed by Apple makes me smile. I see many things in
> Eclipse and wonder why no one has thought of it before (maybe they
> have and I am not aware of it). My latest favorite in Eclipse is
> the smart-semicolons. You can press the semicolon key anywhere in a
> line and it will insert it at the end. This is such a productivity
> boost that I can't live without it. There are a lot of such tiny
> things that just make Eclipse a wonderful IDE. Kind of like the
> many tiny things in Mac OS X that makes it more productive and
> joyful to use.
While I have heard that IntelliJ is even _better_ (!), you have
described my experience with Eclipse perfectly. I don't care in the
least that it does not look like a Cocoa app.
My interest in IntelliJ is piqued, especially if by their "listening
on port 4500" that they can handle the instance class integration with
WOBuilder. Of course, I'll just have to wait and see..
> I only recently started to learn about WO and was using XCode at
> the beginning. I did not want to switch to WOLips/Eclipse because I
> was already tired of scaling the steep learning curve of WO and I
> did not want to spend more time learning how to set up and use
> WOLips/Eclipse. But as much as I tried, I could not tolerate the
> productivity loss in XCode. And so I decided to take the hit and
> switch to WOLips/Eclipse.
Agreed. The productivity boost is jaw dropping.
> I am not a fan of manually editing the wod files. I was impressed
> when I first saw drag-and-drop bindings in WOBuilder (even though I
> am used to it since Nextstep days with InterfaceBuilder; I just did
> not expect it for a web-based UI builder :-). So I stick with
> WOBuilder and EOModeller (you just need to have XCode up and
> running in the background) and do everything else in WOLipse/Eclipse.
>
> I do like the auto-completion in the .wod editor in WOLips, but I
> don't like the fact that the HTML file and the WOD file editing are
> separate (it is the same in WOBuilder as well if you are not using
> drag-n-drop). Having to "declare" a component in the HTML file and
> then switch over to the WOD view to "define" its bindings is not
> efficient; there is too much loss of context.
I think that Mike (who also wrote this editor) has a different work
flow than many of us do. IIRC, he always starts with the WOD
definitions and then moves on to the HTML. If that is not how you
work (or want to or can work), then it probably won't feel as
powerful for you as it does for him. However, that does not mean
that there can't be an alternate editor. We are not stuck with the
"one and only editor syndrome" here. I expect that this next year
will bring at least one competing vision for editing .wo resources.
Some will use one, some will use the other. Some, like me, will
probably use both depending on the task at hand and the project.
Agreed. In my conversations with Mike, this is the one place that
probably separates the interests of Mike and other WO developers on
one side from the other devs. I can code nominally ok, but I'm just
not a text-based HTML/CSS/etc developer. A reasonable stand-in for
WOBuilder to allow initial structural development of each page with
even empty tags is not essential, but is a part of my workflow. Some
of us are just wired differently. I hope that we'll find _something_
commercial or not that can be manipulated to be sufficient both for
intermediate developers, as well as ideal for tutorials and welcoming
to new users.
> I wish the WOLips editor created a virtual view where the HTML file
> and the WOD file are combined so that the "definition" of the
> bindings is in the same place as the "declaration" of the
> component. The virtual view can then generate the HTML and WOD
> files behind the scenes. The virtual view could use its own
> notation which should be shorter than having to type "<WEBOBJECTS
> name=""></WEBOBJECTS>" boilerplate HTML code (this boilerplate is a
> pain even though Eclipse has templates that can make this easier).
An import point to consider here is that we are not limited to this
traditional implementation. The only restriction that the WO
frameworks place is that there is an implementation for
public WOElement template()
I have seen (I think it was another of David Terans "do it like this"
examples that allowed there to me no .wod file, with the HTML
containing (for example)
<WebObject name="Foo" WOComponent="WOHyperlink" class="bigLink"
string=linkTitle/>
He provided a parser that would take this and return the root element.
Perhaps we need to fully annotate and pool are collective knowledge to
date on what is necessary, so that those with the itch can scratch it
instead of pleading with those who for experience or other expertise
levels feel it isn't itching them.
Let your imagination run wild!
Chuck
>
> On Aug 12, 2006, at 11:11 AM, Arturo Pérez wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2006, at 12:15 PM, Michael Halliday wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It is funny ... I installed Eclipse for the first time 2 weeks
>>> ago, before all this WWDC crazy. Just to see what all the fuss
>>> was about. I must admit the interface was completely different
>>> than XCode (obviously) and just didn't have the "feel" I was used
>>> to. I posted on Robert's blog last night ... I can see exactly
>>> where he is coming from.
>>>
>>
>> I've used Eclipse at work for quite a while and I've used Xcode
>> for Java development. I've been a Java developer for almost a
>> decade now.
>>
>> My opinion is that Eclipse is far superior to Xcode for pure Java
>> development. I mean, really, there isn't any comparison at all.
>> But the fact that Xcode includes EOModeller and WOBuilder really
>> swing the balance to it for WO work.
>>
>> That, and the fact that I have abysmal luck in getting Eclipse
>> plug-ins to work, have kept me on Xcode for WO development.
>> (Seriously, I have tried to get something like 50 Eclipse plug-ins
>> working. I think I've gotten maybe 5-6 to work).
>>
>> -arturo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> 40gmail.com
>>
>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> 40global-village.net
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
--
Coming sometime... - an introduction to web applications using
WebObjects and Xcode http://www.global-village.net/wointro
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems. http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden