Re: Scala and WebObjects
Re: Scala and WebObjects
- Subject: Re: Scala and WebObjects
- From: Pascal Robert <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:05:29 -0500
Le 2010-11-11 à 06:45, Anjo Krank a écrit :
>>> To be clear: one of the selling points of Roo as no lock-in. You can use any number of JPA providers, you get code generated which you can customize pretty well via aspect-j (a part of which I would like to see in EO generator so one remove the weird _Foo classes) and you get this without any runtime jars at all.
>> Yeah I've wondered whether we should do class rewriting for _Foo and maybe even EO's period, like Hibernate does.
>
> That'd be nice if it would be possible at all. On the other hand, EOs are *not* beans, so I don't know if you can actually do this and still have all the benefits they have from not being beans. But a bit of experimenting in aspect-j would probably be fun.
>
>>> So it's not D2W, but it's probably good enough to be workable. And given a certain company's abysmal track record in supporting enterprise software, it *might* be good enough for some to be actually considered as an viable alternative for WO/EOF.
>>
>> I was pretty turned off by the demo video when I watched it a few weeks ago ... They LOOOVVVEEE xml files. It looked pretty tedious. That said, if you have to pick something other than WO, I guess you're going to have to sacrifice in some way :)
>
> Well... and EO model in plist format isn't for the faint-hearted either. So it's just a matter of having a reasonable editor (and have someone who writes it).
>
> And Roo seemed to take care of most of the XML stuff for you (they have their own IDE based on eclipse).
>
> That is *not* to say I'm advertising this at all or recommending it or whatever. It's just something I stumbled across that has a few things I would like to have:
>
> - JPA means deployment in app engine
> - halfway-decent CRUD support
> - halfway decent GWT/Ajax/JSON support
> - servlet based -> failover, less state, etc
>
> Oh, and it's open-source :)
I have a question that I kept to myself for months, but let's go public. People talks about moving away from WO or even writing WO/EOF replacements. But AFAIK, Wonder shows that we can extend the core frameworks a lot. Sure, extending WO so that EOF become multi-threaded or anything like this would be a huge task, but from my point of view (a non-technical one), we can do a lot on top of WO to "fix" problems. And to me, it make more sense to extend WO than trying to rewrite it...
I do like the fact that Ravi is trying different different things with WO, and that Vlad did a presentation about Groovy and WO at WOWODC. It show that we can use WO in many different cases.
--
Pascal Robert
email@hidden
AIM/iChat : MacTICanada
LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/macti
Twitter : pascal_robert
_______________________________________________
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