| Once you realize _javascript_ has more in common with LISP than Java you will like it more.
_javascript_ *can* be programmed in a Java-like manner and the syntax shares many similarities when you treat it that way. That does not mean that you *should.”
You’ll gain a deeper understanding when you read a bit about “prototype” languages:
The famous JS library “Prototype” is named what it is for a very good reason, it is not because it makes it faster to make an "application prototype."
Attacking _javascript_ with a procedural mindset will make you sick, eventually. You’ll feel that _javascript_ is brittle and difficult. It is for this same reason I cannot stand jQuery-Mobile and frameworks like them. You feel like you are coming to speed quickly but then you realize you have spaghetti code that is hard to maintain.
Just like with WO, learning the “magic” (the right way) is better than quickly hacking on something. Sure, if you already know SQL you can start making JSP (java server pages) almost immediately… but don’t you think *now* that you use an ORM (EOF - EntityModeler) that it was worth it to figure out that mental abstraction?
A proper understanding of _javascript_, with more of a LISP or even a Smalltalk mindset, will make coding, debugging, and development a breeze. Understanding how to think in the Prototype object model and using “blocks” are key. The difference between a “function reference” and “executing a function” are key, even anonymous functions.
On the client side, That’s where JS really shines. Again, I don’t like jQuery-Mobile because you are stringing HTML pages together, you aren’t building an app and you aren’t thinking the best way. Here I would use something like Enyo or JO (there are others). I like Enyo because it has a Web-based GUI that feels like the old WOBuilder / Interface Builder days. The better _javascript_ app environments don’t have you coding ANY html.
On the server side, node.js and its kin are “cool” but I don’t see any technical advantage over WO other than "You like JS more than Java.” There are many more benefits to WO.
I don’t know of any true failings in WO. Our ORM works well. I don’t believe ORM is always the best solution but if I had to use one, I’d want to use EOF. I’ll present on the limits of ORM and how to work around them elegantly with WO at this year’s WOWODC.
How many versions of Adobe Photoshop do we need? Aren’t they done yet? In fact, some of the older versions are better if you do nefarious deeds with it. By the same token, WO is feature complete. We don’t need a new version out from Apple. Anjo and I are happy to use WO 5.3 because with Wonder WO 5.4 didn’t get us anything. Really, nothing at all. Apple does not need us… we also do not need Apple to be viable. Apple has given us more than enough already. Be thankful.
Though we are feature complete, I do see some people trying to make new things for WO and trying to give back but are met with friction. People like Ken Ishimoto. To me that’s our biggest issue. It’s not so easy to get your contributions into WOnder. We have a gentleman’s club.
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
|