Re: Would You Use WOs On A New Project
Re: Would You Use WOs On A New Project
- Subject: Re: Would You Use WOs On A New Project
- From: David LeBer <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:46:39 -0400
On 15-Apr-08, at 4:26 PM, Nolan Whitaker wrote:
All,
I suppose that I wasn't entirely clear with my question. I know
that web objects is written in Java, implementing a number of the
Cocoa classes. My question is why use a product like WOs when
classes that perform an equivalent function generally exist in the
current Java spec.
What can I do with the WebOjects classes that I can't do with
generic Java? And if there is essentially little or no additional
funcationality, why add the extra layer of code? (I'm under the
impression that there are few, if any, WO classes that can't be
mapped to one or more Java classes in combination that perform the
same function.)
Nolan,
You are an avid user of Cocoa? WebObjects is an application framework
like Cocoa (and CoreData) only for the web.
An analog to your question in the desktop space would be: Why use
Cocoa instead of Carbon?
The NS* classes supplied by the JavaFoundation framework are useful
(primarily because of their KVC support) but add little compared with
what the rest of the WebObjects frameworks bring. The two primary
framework stacks in WebObjects are WOF (WebObjects Framework) and EOF
(Enterprise Object Framework) WOF handles the binding and
synchronization between objects and html elements (essentially the V &
C layers of MVC) and EOF abstracts your database into objects (the M).
There are other Java libraries that aim to solve similar problems
(Struts/Hybernate/JSF/etc) but I think you'd find most members of this
list would work very hard to avoid having to using them.
Conceptually WO is very similar to Cocoa and brings the same forward
thinking and elegant strategies to many of the problems facing web
application developers. Although WO is considered old by web
standards, personally I believe it still maintains a commanding lead
over it's (other) Java competitors.
Thanks,
Nolan
On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:47 PM, Ken Anderson wrote:
Nolan,
The beauty of WebObjects being implemented 100% in Java is you
don't have to make that choice. You can leverage the power of
WebObjects and EOF, and still use any other Java libraries you want.
Ken
On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:25 PM, Nolan Whitaker wrote:
Hello.
First off, let me say that I absolutely love what Apple has done
with Cocoa.
(I owned a NeXTStation '040 back in the mid 1990s and now wish I had
done more software development with it instead of trading it for a
Sun Sparc 5,
but hindsight is 20/20. )
I'm in the process of working up an idea for a client/server
application that will
have a rich front end written in Cocoa as well as a web-based
front end.
Most, if not all, of the server-based portion of the application
will be
written in Java.
When Web Objects first appeared, the Java API was rather sparse.
There wasn't support for a number of classes that exist now, and
using WOs
made a lot sense. Given that I am already familiar with Cocoa
classes,
using WOs still makes some sense given that it implements many of
the Cocoa
classes that I am familiar using and makes database access a
little easier.
My question is this, given the rich API that Java offers today,
why should I use
Web Objects on a new project?
;david
--
David LeBer
Codeferous Software
'co-def-er-ous' adj. Literally 'code-bearing'
site: http://codeferous.com
blog: http://davidleber.net
profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidleber
--
Toronto Area Cocoa / WebObjects developers group:
http://tacow.org
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
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