Re: State of WebObjects
Re: State of WebObjects
- Subject: Re: State of WebObjects
- From: Scott Henderson <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:46:15 -0500
First, Thank You to all who have responded and participated to my post.
Good information.
Tim, I am particularly interested in your newbie experience. As I
mentioned, OO programming is going to be a new experience for me. I
like the procedural approach... it seems natural and logical. That
said, I am completely open to embracing the OO approach. Based on
your fresh experience, do have any particular Learning Path or
Resources that you feel stand-out. I have been reading the WO Docs
and they make sense, but I have not begun to use any of the Tools. I
really hope to become competent to put together a fairly basic data-
based website sooner rather than later. Hoping to grasp WO quick
enough to accomplish the task... and refine my skills as time goes on.
I always find I learn 'new' things best when motivated. I am
motivated to learn WO. Just wanted to make sure it was a good bet.
Thanks for any further comments.
Scott
On Jun 28, 2006, at 5:33 PM, Timmy wrote:
I've enjoyed learning to be a curmudgeon. :-)
I can speak to this topic being pretty fresh. I do agree that prior
to taking on my current project (which really necessitated learning
something more powerful like WO), I was attracted to more
procedural, interpreted languages. It really has taken me quite a
while and I'm still considered a newbie in these halls but object
oriented programming has really freed me in my opinion. I can
conceptualize problems and their solutions in a completely
different way.
Certainly, having EOF and key/value coding on top of that is really
a bonus. My first WO project has been highly complex and taken much
more time than expected to get done - mostly due to my own
deficiencies noted above. I've enjoyed solving the puzzle. However,
this product is going to be without peer on our campus. This is all
to say, I think WO is an excellent choice if you have the time to
learn something new - and learn it right. As previously noted, I
can't see WO really going anywhere with it being so entrenched in
Apple. Although the use of jsp for the new support discussion
boards makes me go "hmmmm."
Tim
p.s. I also like that there are some job opportunities for folks
who know this technology so it is worthwhile from that perspective
(from my vantage point).
On Jun 28, 2006, at 3:21 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
<unsubstantiated-theory-mode>
I think there's something about interpreted languages that makes a
psychological difference for "non-programmers". Perl, PHP, Ruby,
Javascript all attract many of the same types of people (not that
Ruby doesn't attract programmer types as well, but those languages
all tend to attract "non-programmers" more than, say, Java), and I
think there's something to be said for not having a compile
stage. There's a certain freedom that it presents for people who
tend to be more unstructured (i.e. designers) in their approach to
solving programming problems. Additionally, I believe weak typing
plays a role in a similar way. I'm personally a fan of strong
typing, but I can see the weak-typing, interpreted allure for
someone who is starting out in development by "messing around" or
just tweaking a program they got from somewhere else. There is a
certain intellectual overhead in compiling and typing that I can
see being a turnoff for that approach to developing.
So while I do agree that conceptually they're both doing very
similar things, I think those additional attributes DO make a
difference.
And of course it's just hot and WO is for curmudgeons like all of
us :)
</unsubstantiated-theory-mode>
ms
I still don't see this. A Rails scaffolding app is analogous to
a WO Wizard or D2W app; they both have the same advantages and
disadvantages, and take roughly the same amount of time to set
up. If you don't see people using WO to do this, it doesn't mean
that it can't be done - it just means that Rails is the latest
flavour of the month, evangelical product.
As for the concepts, there are just as many. You still need to
learn the frameworks, and Rails has a lot of things that aren't
intuitively obvious (just the same as WO, only different); the
naming conventions, for one thing. The only real difference I
see is that WO is fanatical about MVC (in comparison to Rails),
and Rails likes to blur the edges. This could be a really
important difference, and quite possibly the only significant one.
Paul
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40mdimension.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:
40thetimmy.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:
This email sent to email@hidden