• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Scala and WebObjects
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Scala and WebObjects


  • Subject: Re: Scala and WebObjects
  • From: Joe Little <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:55:40 -0800

Well, all this talk about Roo still makes me unsure of what people
find the most compelling part of WO that they are starting to look at
other technologies for. Indeed, we are all a little skittish over
future directions and future releases with a perhaps non-growing
community. I still find Grails to be more to my taste and it fits a
lot of the technology points I want to find in WO. I haven't thought
about Grails for about a year, but the latest support of Redis in GORM
makes things pretty interesting again.

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Pascal Robert <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Le 2010-11-11 à 19:12, Chuck Hill a écrit :
>
>> On Nov 11, 2010, at 4:05 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
>>
>>
>>> 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...
>>
>> Was there a question in there?
>
> The question is more that I don't understand why people wants to rewrite WO when you can simply extend it. To me, it's just like the Linux people who keeps rewriting stuff instead of improving it. It's incredible the number of stuff on FreshMeat that do almost the same thing and that could be done in one or two applications instead of dozens of them.
>
>
> --
> 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
>
 _______________________________________________
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

References: 
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Ravi Mendis <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Marius Soutier <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Anjo Krank <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Karl <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Anjo Krank <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Anjo Krank <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Pascal Robert <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Scala and WebObjects (From: Pascal Robert <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Scala and WebObjects
  • Next by Date: Re: Scala and WebObjects
  • Previous by thread: Re: Scala and WebObjects
  • Next by thread: Re: Scala and WebObjects
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread