Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Java Programming IT Technology

A First Look At Red Hat Developer Studio 149

Posted by kdawson from the ides-of-august dept.
juanignaciosl writes "The first beta of Red Hat Developer Studio was published yesterday. RHDS seems promising. This IDE is a bunch of Eclipse plugins that comes from the fusion of JBoss IDE and Exadel Studio. The main advantages it offers are: JSF development improved, in particular integrating RichFaces and Ajax4JSF libraries; Seam (next J2EE middleware standard?) integration; and plugins for JBoss, Hibernate... Here are my first impressions."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A First Look At Red Hat Developer Studio More

A First Look At Red Hat Developer Studio

Comments Filter:

  • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Azarael ( 896715 )
      I'd settle for an IDE that would actually build and deploy one of their *example* J2EE projects.. apparently this is the hard part.

    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by bigtangringo ( 800328 )
      RAM, NIC, HDD, XHTML, CSS, XML, PNG, JPEG, BSD, et cetera ad nauseum.

      Seriously, do these acronyms mean anything to anyone?

      In case you may have never considered it, people actually involved with these technologies may actually know what they mean and do.

    • Re:But does it support JCV (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:38PM (#20251695)
      > Seriously, do these flavor of the month java libraries mean anything to anyone?

      Yes, they make them specifically for no-talent hacks on slashdot can sneer at them and say how they could write a distributed transaction backend with reliable multicast messaging using PHP and MySQL in a week.
      • Hell, I could do that in an hour, if I can define the following terms:

        distributed
        transaction
        reliable
        multicast messaging

      • Re:But does it support JCV (Score:4, Insightful)

        by FatherOfONe ( 515801 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @03:48PM (#20253983)
        Well put.

        I have to say that the place I use to work standardized in Java and Linux on the servers and everything worked well. Then I left and they hired a new kid out of college that couldn't believe how "long" it took to code stuff using JSF/Java. He pushed and pushed to do a project in PHP. He quoted around one fifth the time to do a project that another developer had quoted to do in Java, saying that the time using PHP would more than make up the difference. In short, the project took around 2X as long as the original Java quote (~10X as long as he had quoted) and thus they are back to working with Java again. I am not about to say that any language is bad, but when you focus 70+% of your effort on business logic, (most of our work), then it is a little hard to believe someone when they say that language X is 5X faster than language Y.

        My question about this new IDE from RedHat is this:
        Can I do visual JSF development in a true WYSIWYG environment like Netbeans?

        Can I do Swing development in a WYSIWYG environemnt like Netbeans?

        Can I easily choose not to use the custom components that you include? I would assume so, but my fear is that RedHat focused on this product working with JBOSS and getting it to work with other application servers may be a pain.

        I like Eclipse, but I have found Netbeans 5.5 to be better for what I do so migrating back to Eclipse would take some great features, and would be interested to see how far this has come. Oh yeah, and one last, but very important thing. You still don't hack Eclipse on Linux to run under the GCJ crap do you? If you did that then I can only imagine all the problems I had using your product before would be back again. I hope now that Java is under the GPL that you don't mess with that abomination (GCJ) and have included the real JVM with your Linux and more specifically don't have any of your tools reliant on the GCJ.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by LDoggg_ ( 659725 )
          Why the hate towards GCJ?

          Sure it wasn't as fast or complete as the Sun JVM, but it was being developed as an open source project during the years that Sun had kept still their JVM and libraries proprietary.
          Heck, gcj and gnu classpath were good enough to run tomcat a couple of years ago, and it's not like anyone was forced to use it. While Sun's jvm was proprietary, Redhat could only bundle eclipse with gcj on their own distro. But it never took away from anyone wanting to run eclipse on the sun jvm or add

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by FatherOfONe ( 515801 )
            I guess I do hate GCJ now that you mention it. The countless bugs I had to fight just to realize that it didn't work well has left scars on me that won't go away quickly.

            I also know some people at RedHat (not well, I will admit) and their hate for Java makes view of GCJ appear to be love. They flat out HATE HATE HATE Java. Now they kept saying that they "couldn't ship Suns JVM", but the reality is that they don't want to ship one or include one easily like SuSE or Ubuntu.

            If I implied that Eclipse had to

  • HuH? (Score:3, Funny)

    by russ1337 ( 938915 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:15PM (#20251397)
    "This IDE is a bunch of Eclipse plugins that comes from the fusion of JBoss IDE and Exadel Studio. The main advantages it offers are: JSF development improved, in particular integrating RichFaces and Ajax4JSF libraries; Seam (next J2EE middleware standard?) integration; and plugins for JBoss, Hibernate.."

    Now I know that is in English, but I have no idea what half of those words mean.

    • You think he knows more about the words than you do? Those who know, do. Those who don't talk.

      • Re:HuH? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:23PM (#20251499) Homepage Journal
        You think he knows more about the words than you do? Those who know, do. Those who don't talk.

        those who don't and think they do, post on slashdot.

        • You think he knows more about the words than you do? Those who know, do. Those who don't talk.

          those who don't and think they do, post on slashdot.

          When did management find out about slashdot?! Quick, distract them with a whitepaper, I have to change my bio!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by josath ( 460165 )
          you need to de-spam your blog. or are all those comments about "gay wrestling" really legitimate?

    • Re:HuH? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Bluesman ( 104513 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:25PM (#20251553) Homepage
      That's not the submitter's problem. You need to bone up on some acronyms, or you'll never make a goodJavaProgrammer. Here's a quick lesson in what you should do:

      Write a thousand different programs using acronyms that start with J that do nothing except fuck up the data as it's being transmitted between the database and your application. Then, you have to write automated tools that also are acronyms that start with J and contain the word "Bean" in there somewhere, and those exist to generate parts of those previously mentioned thousand programs.

      Then, write some Swing components that have nothing to do with all of this, and call those by almost exactly the same names, so that people get confused and can't do a proper Google search for documentation. Name an IDE after the Swing components, too.

      Finally, call it all "middleware," give it yet ANOTHER name and bundle it all together, making sure that everything breaks if you don't include fifty different XML configuration files in the proper directory hierarchy that changes with each version.

      Then when all of this doesn't work for more than one project because it's hopelessly complex, do it all over again and call it the next greatest revolution in Java middleware.

      • LOL, you don't sound bitter or anything.....

        You made my day.

        • Re:HuH? (Score:5, Funny)

          by Bluesman ( 104513 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:35PM (#20251671) Homepage
          Actually, I was being a bit facetious.

          People actually DO get J2EE apps to work. Here is a very informative instructional video by some Japanese researchers who show how it's done:

          J2EE Example [youtube.com]

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by TheLink ( 130905 )
            I find it funny/scary that the XML config files are often larger than fairly complex programs written in other languages ;).

            • Re:HuH? (Score:5, Interesting)

              by Bluesman ( 104513 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @02:11PM (#20252901) Homepage
              Me too. I think that's what happens when you try to make a all-in-one solution without realizing there's a tradeoff between power and flexibility. You either make something that's too specific to be useful so that users have to constantly fight against design decisions you made, or something that requires almost as much work to make it do what you want than writing it from scratch would.

              The ridiculously complex configuration files are a symptom of moving as many design decisions as possible out to the last possible moment. Complexity isn't reduced, it's just in a different place.

              Which, ironically, makes the whole thing that much more complex, since now you have multiple places things can go wrong.

              I tried using this stuff years ago, and found it wasn't close to worth the hassle, especially for a single developer. I just did a search for "J2EE success story," and the vast majority of hits were about a small team of Python programmers replacing large J2EE teams that failed to produce a working product.

              But maybe I'm wrong, and the people who know much more than I do about this can list a hundred different projects where J2EE saved the company. It just seems like it's overhyped and people are really much more concerned about the scaffolding they're using than the work that they're supposed to be doing with it.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by bberens ( 965711 )
                I've successfully used JMS in a high availability application (security system monitoring software) before and I have to say that you're correct. J2EE stuff is nice but it can also be very complex. In our situation JMS worked out exceptionally well and saved a ton of development time. However, it's just a tool. 99.9% of the time you don't need J2EE stuff to accomplish what you're doing. I think of J2EE in many the same ways I think about AJAX. It's a nice toy/tool but a little bit can go a long way an

              • Re:HuH? (Score:5, Insightful)

                by computational super ( 740265 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @04:34PM (#20254529)
                I just did a search for "J2EE success story," and the vast majority of hits were about a small team of Python programmers replacing large J2EE teams that failed to produce a working product.

                I'm not convinced that this is entirely Java/J2EE's fault as much as it is that big corporations love Java and hate Python (and Perl) and have "big-corporatized" Java. Java was actually pretty cool when it first came out... if big industry embraced Python today, by tomorrow you'd see an explosion of PBPEL, P2EE, PDBC, PFaces, PSF and PMS applications and by the next day you'd be assigned to a committee to evaluate the product vendors to find the scalable enterprise solution that was the best fit for your business integration challenges. After a month of vendor selections, you'd narrow the candidates down to the top two contenders, and they'd pitch their expertise in the field, and then your company would sign a multi-million dollar contract with one of them. Then you'd start the process of trying to figure out how to get around the inherent limitations of the "solution" and do plain-old Python programming inside the "container" without it being too obvious to the higher-ups that that's what you're doing...

              • While I agree that complex configuration files are a bane to development, I disagree with the assertion that J2EE requires them. ORM technologies like JPA [sun.com] are utilizing Java 5 annotations to declare configuration inline with code instead of XML. Frameworks like Wicket and GWT are providing developers with Java solutions to UI that are devoid of XML configuration, JSP, and markup-heavy implementations. IMHO, Wicket [apache.org] deserves to be called a breath of fresh air.

                I do think it's a mistake for J2EE to includ

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by TheLink ( 130905 )
                Actually I disagree "slightly". I see power and flexibility as related.

                You can have power, flexibility and even ease of use.

                The trick is to pick the right defaults. It's definitely not always easy for the designer.

                What put me off from Java when it first came out was stuff like:

                Method to find the number of rows returned from an SQL query - go to the last row, get row num. Lots of stuff like that.

                Basically a lot of the libraries felt like they were written by someone who was told by someone else to write it b
      • Hahaha, this is so dead-on.

        Too many programmers out there that think they can write middleware, when oftentimes the best thing to do is just to Finish The Damn Project.

      • That's not the submitter's problem. You need to bone up on some acronyms, or you'll never make a goodJavaProgrammer. Here's a quick lesson in what you should do:

        Write a thousand different programs using acronyms that start with J that do nothing except fuck up the data as it's being transmitted between the database and your application. Then, you have to write automated tools that also are acronyms that start with J and contain the word "Bean" in there somewhere, and those exist to generate parts of those previously mentioned thousand programs.

        Huh? Are we using JBuilder? Bean... ah, we're talking J2EE. Something to build...something to build... if only we had 'factories' or something.

        Then, write some Swing components that have nothing to do with all of this, and call those by almost exactly the same names, so that people get confused and can't do a proper Google search for documentation. Name an IDE after the Swing components, too.

        How about that 60 meg folder called 'Docs' that comes with the JDK? It's even got pictures! You can drill down to the 'swing' section (think about the naming and that 'J' thing again while viewing this vs. the SWT ;) )

        Finally, call it all "middleware," give it yet ANOTHER name and bundle it all together, making sure that everything breaks if you don't include fifty different XML configuration files in the proper directory hierarchy that changes with each version.

        I guess it could be called 'glueware'. Try starting with '.', the hierarchy descends from there. Regardless of what your manager read in 'Buzz

        • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

          by dkf ( 304284 )

          Huh? Are we using JBuilder? Bean... ah, we're talking J2EE. Something to build...something to build... if only we had 'factories' or something.
          You do realize that 'factories' are old hat? You need a factory factory factory [joelonsoftware.com] these days...

      • Then, write some Swing components that have nothing to do with all of this, and call those by almost exactly the same names, so that people get confused and can't do a proper Google search for documentation.

        You know, you can avoid these kinds of naming problems if you just add a few more subdomains to your website.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Eddi3 ( 1046882 )
      If you don't know what was said there, you probably don't need to know.
    • C'mon! Haven't You heard about VS.NET (aka Orcas) and shiny new C# (formerly known as NGWS) with LINQ and DLINQ support, together with ASP.NET, VB.NET and WCF (aka Indigo), WPF (aka Avalon), WCS (aka Infocard), WCS (aka Workflow), running on top of CLR and MSIL (which is MS implementation of ACME CIL) which together is known as CLI, of course running on top of Vista (aka Longhorn). Just to scrape the surface. Ya 'now, it's the digital era...
    • I believe the appropriate tag is 'yahooseriousfestival'.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kaffiene ( 38781 )
      ...just like most of the morons on /. who claim that Java is crap yet have no idea how it is actually used.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Shados ( 741919 )
        What do you mean?! We know how its used! Have you seen JSP?! Its exactly like PHP! You stick all your logic and your tags in one big file with a bunch of conditionals, and you're set! Of course we know how java is used. Oh, and servlets? Same thing as PERL/CGI! Wha? Whats a design pattern? MVC? Strut? Bah, buzzwords!

  • Sounds promising.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jshriverWVU ( 810740 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:25PM (#20251555)
    for Java developers. What I'd really like to see is something like Project Builder/Xcode or Visual Studio for Linux. (Not that I like Visual Studio) but if you need to pound out a GUI it's pretty easy. There's a relatively large learning curve for developers wanting to do work for X. There is a myriad of libraries with their own widgets to choose from, languages, IDE's. It get's a bit confusing when you just want to sit down and code something, or add a GUI to an existing cli app.

    Trolltech's suite so far has been the best one I've seen yet but has licensing issues. I've tried KDevelop and it's not that bad, but still not great. The ones I've seen for gnome have been even harder.

    A good IDE for developing GUI applications, should help the developer a bit more with the GUI stuff and not make it mandatory that you know every call to every function of every widget for whatever library that package supports. If you knew that, might as well stick with Emacs/vi/nano and code it. Which it seems is how most development is done. (which isn't bad) but makes it harder for someone else starting out and wanting to give it a try.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ianare ( 1132971 )
      There are several IDEs for linux, my favorites: boa-constructor [sourceforge.net], glade [gnome.org].

      • Re:Sounds promising.. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by TheAwfulTruth ( 325623 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:55PM (#20251883) Homepage
        GUI builders are not IDEs they are one of MANY components to a real IDE.

        An actual IDE takes care of GUI design, code editing, debugging, project management, documentation, source control and on and on. And they are scripted environments with plug-in interfaces, compilers and debuggers source control front entds etc. so that you can choose what programs you want to use for what tasks.

        That is an Integrated Devlopment Environment. Admitedly IDEs are not for everyone but as this is the subject...

        Visual Studio is hardly "perfect" but it is BY FAR in advace of /anything/ I've used on Linux that calls itself an "IDE".

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by thelima ( 1045360 )
          De gustibus not dispu^H^H^H^Hblah, blah, blah. But You know - I could hardly consider development environment something without support of unit-testing built-in (don't tell me about VSTS). I could sacrifice all graphical wizards for single one feature of Eclipse IDE which is not available in VS.NET (without third party plugins) - live compilation together with quick fixes. To give You feeling, when I have a bug it is immediately highlighted (no save no magic keystrokes). Not only this but also I can see *A

          • I could hardly consider development environment something without support of unit-testing built-in

            OK. Enough already. How much effort does it really take to add an extra target to your makefile, run the unit test and diff the expected output against the actual output? Every "unit testing framework" I've ever looked at has been thousands of lines of cruft just so you can do something like "assert(output < 2);".

            I've got an open mind though. Convince me. Please don't cite Cxxtest as an example.

        • > Visual Studio is hardly "perfect" but it is BY FAR in advace of /anything/ I've used on Linux that calls itself an "IDE".

          What about eclipse?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dodobh ( 65811 )
          (x)emacs.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      try netbeans (www.netbeans.org). it's fairly straight forward, and has a nice gui builder for swing called matisse. it's drag and drop from a palette.

      personally, I use eclipse with swtbuilder and other stuff, but netbeans out-of-the-box experience is much better.
      • Can you use Netbeans/Eclipse/etc with languages other than Java?

        I downloaded and checked them out briefly before, but it seemed like all of the good Gui IDE's for Linux were all geared toward Java. Would like something for C/C++.

        • eclipse can switch to c/c++ among many others, sniff around http://www.eclipse.org/ [eclipse.org]

          Ive just started using it, probably overkill in the extreme for me but its very nice and works out of the box for gcc.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Reapman ( 740286 )
            My problem is integrating a library with em... I'm by no means a pro at programming, but I don't think it should be nearly as complex as it is to add libraries such as SDL to Eclipse, KDevelop, or Ajunta (or w/e it's called) Or importing existing code into a project. As much as I hate em, I still haven't found an IDE as polished as MS's Visual Studio (yeah yeah all you really need is gcc and vi, but I like my Full on IDE damnit :D)

            • I still haven't found an IDE as polished as MS's Visual Studio

              Yeah, when you have complete control of the widgets, libraries, languages, run-time environments and the OS they run on, you can crank out some pretty slick stuff. I get a kick out of Windows asking me if I want to debug stuff like Acrobat Reader or Lotus Notes because they've gotten an access violation or some such. Visual Studio isn't the best IDE I've used, but it's definitely the best integrated. And the fastest — if you single-step through some of the .NET stuff and have some non-trivial vari

        • Netbeans no, I don't think so, Eclipse, definitively. There are extreme amounts of eclipse plugins out there, the problem is getting them to work, setting them up and understanding them.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Xiaran ( 836924 )
            Oh and netBeans seems to have a lot of ruby support these days... tho I havent really used it.

  • TextMate (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Paulrothrock ( 685079 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:38PM (#20251701) Homepage Journal

    I have yet to see an IDE that has a text editor that compares to TextMate. The fonts are ugly, color/theme management is poor, integration with the PC is poor or non-existent, and macros and custom code are much more difficult than TextMate.

    These may be good when you need to manage massive projects, but I can't stand to use them for actually writing code. If there was only some way to replace the text editor in these IDEs with TextMate but keep all the trappings that make compiling and deploying these apps easy.

    • Actually, the IDEs (or at least Eclipse) seems to fall down in our department when dealing with larger applications. It's great for toy apps, but a lot of the plugins have problems scaling. The core ones are usually adequate, but third party ones are dreck.
    • Emacs, maybe?
      Honestly, if all that a purely Mac OS X oriented editor is gonna come up with is some obscure, yet-another-programm-specific configuration and automation language that I have to learn to automate and speed up my everyday tasks, then I might aswell use the CLI version of Emacs right away. Ok, the 20 basic commands are really bizar (Crtl+V == Page down; Alt+V == Page up, Ctrl+x (for 'eXecute') Ctrl+s == Save, etc... ) but when I then go on to learn automation via Lisp, at least then I know my pro
      • The ultimate difference between a text editor and and IDE as far as I'm concerned, is that a text editor doesn't really parse your code like a compiler does. Oh, it does a little parsing for syntax highlighting, and if you strap in some extra applications you can get some cross-referencing, documentation access and even a little autocompletion... but an IDE knows what type that variable is.

        I tried a very-beta haskell plugin for Visual Studio. It was a real shock (I've just used editors for haskell before).

  • Some info about our project (Score:5, Informative)

    by _marshall ( 71584 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @12:51PM (#20251829) Homepage
    Hey everyone.. I work on the JBossTools and RHDS Team and just wanted to give some community-level info about our project.

    Red Hat Developer Studio is our commercial offering of the JBossTools open source project (formerly known as JBossIDE), which has a vibrant community of users and contributors. You can check out our project(s) at the following URLs:

    JBossTools main page: http://jboss.org/tools [jboss.org]
    JBossTools blog: http://jbosstools.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
    JBossTools 2.0.0.beta3: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group _id=22866&package_id=242269&release_id=531957 [sourceforge.net]
    RHDS 1.0.0.beta1 (based on JBossTools 2.0.0.beta3): http://www.redhat.com/developers/rhds/index.html [redhat.com]

    Feel free to drop by #jbosstools on freenode, we'd love to hear from you!

  • Jesus Christ, will someone please rip off ASP.NET? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by melted ( 227442 ) on Thursday August 16, 2007 @01:49PM (#20252637) Homepage
    Jesus Christ, will someone please rip off ASP.NET? I've looked at all the crazy proliferation of Java web frameworks and they all pretty much suck. You have to maintain a bunch of XML files for things that ASP.NET just figures out on its own, docs suck, architecture is bizarre. It's all just a giant, productivity draining mess. Why can't I just have transparent interaction between the page and code? Why do I have to "register" crap (through XML file) that should just be available transparently from page code? Why do I have to create "navigation rules"? Why do I have to "declare beans"?

    No wonder turds like Ruby on Rails are so popular. I'd rather shoot myself than use Java for web development.
    • try wicket [apache.org]. no xml, no navigation rules, not a single piece of code in your markup files (it's simply not possible), ALL logic is in the java files. no stupid bean mapping to forms, a component concept (oh, there i can download a tabbed panel component, let's do this) that actually works. it really is what i think MVC should be like.

      and a very good api design, KISS, no overhead and all that core servlet stuff is hidden from you.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jma05 ( 897351 )
        It's missing an important piece to be compared to ASP.NET. Proper IDE support. After all that is what this discussion is about (No, the Eclipse, Netbeans plugins don't hold a candle).

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by killjoe ( 766577 )
          What are you talking about. Both eclipse and netbeans (and intellij IDEA) are vastly superior to Visual Studio.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by jma05 ( 897351 )
            I was talking about the Wicket integration into these IDEs. ASP.NET is well integrated into VS. Wicket integration through plugins is relatively thin. Don't get me wrong. I have not used VS in 3-4 years although I have a copy and have been using Netbeans and Eclipse.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by killjoe ( 766577 )
              I don't know about wicket per se but I bet it has an eclipse plug in. Every framework known to mankind has an eclipse plug in.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by jma05 ( 897351 )
                Read my post again. I am saying that Wicket has plugins (for all 3 major IDEs in fact) and that they are nowhere as integrated as ASP.NET natively is with VS. Having a plugin says nothing. A plugin may do little more than add a couple of config files and add a build task to the project. That cannot equate with polished products.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by killjoe ( 766577 )
                  >I am saying that Wicket has plugins (for all 3 major IDEs in fact) and that they are nowhere as integrated as ASP.NET natively is with VS.

                  What the hell does that mean?

                  What specifically is your gripe about the wicket plug in?

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by jma05 ( 897351 )
                    > What specifically is your gripe about the wicket plug in?

                    What gripe? I don't have any. My point is that ASP.NET is not comparable to Wicket. It's like comparing Delphi to Eclipse with a C++ plugin. Both will do the job. The development experience is nowhere similar.

                    1. Can you drag and drop widgets into a WYSIWYG page designer and set properties in a Wicket plugin?
                    2. Can you find (free or commercial) the same spectrum of third party components that will also show up in your workbench?
                    3. Can you visually

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by chochos ( 700687 )
        I checked the HelloWorld example, it look very similar to Tapestry (another Apache project). Two very similar projects under the same roof... no wonder web development is such a mess. Granted, Tapestry is more complex than wicket (at first sight; I'd have to look deeper). Looks like in wicket they got rid of the intermediate .page of .jwc files (XML files with the component definitions for the stuff in the HTML files; the page/jwc files is where you define the connections between UI components and the contr
    • Sounds like you're looking for Seam. All the xml stuff is optional in Seam, so you'll actually come to like the xml configs for its good parts (like complex navigation rules) when you're not forced to use it for everything. No declaration needed, you don't even need "backing beans" or even a class for your page (take that, ASP.NET).

      If you really want tight integration between page and code, there's wicket (which I frankly find awful) or Tapestry5 (which looks really nice, but it's not finished yet). Or i
    • Try click.sourceforge.net. Seriously. No nonsense, just a couple of jar files, no messing around with a hundred xml files, no stupid theories about IoC, Dependency Injection etc.. All pretty simple.

  • Start getting everyone you know to start leaning on the folks at CodeWorks [codeworks.com] to get Delphi & C++ Builder ported over to Linux. Say what you will about Borland [borland.com], but imagine those 3 tools being completely X-Platform between Win32, Linux ( Gnome & KDE ) and OS-X. That alone would put a very LARGE dent in Visual Studio.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Someone's been mean to you! Tell me who it is, so I can punch him tastefully." -- Ralph Bakshi's Mighty Mouse

Close