Discussions

News: No Perfect Web Framework

  1. No Perfect Web Framework (8 messages)

    DZone also hosted "Perfect Web Framework? There Ain't One" by one of the fourteen rabid Wicket developers. He points out that no web framework is perfect; for a read-only web site, he'd use Wordpress. He's got some good points.

    What's funny is that he almost bypasses wicket, saying that wicket's ideal for webapps that have a mix of user interactivity and content presentation, written by developers who are good at Java or Scala and understand object orientation.

    Wordpress for the 95% read-only sites, and GWT or Vaadin for rich internet apps (or just an HTML/JS/CSS front end).

    His closing advice is classic:

    There really is no “perfect” web framework, a search for one is futile and the results will largely be dependent on what you are trying to solve and how well it fits with your skills and way of thinking (though sometimes a learning curve is more than worth the effort). Use what works for you and your project, and evaluate your choice based on those criteria.

    Oh, just don’t use Struts or JSF. They’re useless piles of donkey poo, unfit for any purpose given the multitude of alternatives. Extended use of Struts or JSF will make any reasonable man want to stab themselves repeatedly in the Cerebral cortex with a rusty spoon just to end the misery.

    So, donkey poo authors, what do you say about that?

    Threaded Messages (8)

  2. No Perfect Web Framework[ Go to top ]

    So, donkey poo authors, what do you say about that?

     

    I reckon the appropriate thing to say would be sorry

     

  3. No Perfect Web Framework[ Go to top ]

    I do not have so much hatred for JSF. In fact JSF + Rich faces provides a lot of out of the box functionality.

  4. No Perfect Web Framework[ Go to top ]

    I do not have so much hatred for JSF. In fact JSF + Rich faces provides a lot of out of the box functionality.

    But why do you should *have* hatred for JSF? It's a perfectly fine framework, which provides powerful templating, validation and has lots of components available for it.

    The only reason I can think of why people feel they should hate JSF even when they don't, is because of the poison being spread by especially the Wicket guys and to some lesser extend the Spring guys. Just as with EJB, their many posts on forums and their many blog postings somehow gave the feeling that hating EJB and JSF is "what normal people do".

    Since most people have a basic tendency to fit it, it more or less became the norm in the blogosphere to excuse yourself for not hating JSF. But I don't think "normal people" in general hate JSF. The numerous postings of the Wicket fans might have made it look like this, but they obviously have their own agenda.

    Even after their numerous attacks and their stories about how utterly great Wicket is, it's still only a very small majority of developers that actually use Wicket. In fact, I was at Devoxx and the question about who used Wicket was asked in one of the fully packed large rooms, and barely anyone raised their hands. During lunch I got in touch with a fair amount of other developers, asking what they were using, and I didn't encounter a single person using Wicket.

    So please, don't feel obliged to excuse yourself for not hating JSF, especially to Wicket fans.

  5. No Perfect Web Framework[ Go to top ]

    Amen to that!
    JSF 2 is as great framework, don't let the Wicket guys tell you otherwise. They just want to promote their own stuff and very aggresively try to blacken the name of all else that's out there.

  6. Now, Wille Faler is a developer I would say definitely knows what he is talking about. Very concise, clear, and level headed, minus elaborate SWAG (scientific wild ass guesses) presentations and subjective scoring data.

    Your choice of framework will be based on skillsets, skill levels, problem domain, usage restrictions, framework popularity/support base, etc.

    Like I mentioned in the earlier Matt Raible post, if we're talking about a heavy data display based website, there are things already out there for that which are more appropriate, e.g. WordPress, and the like. Web App Frameworks are for Web Apps.

    With the exception of web app frameworks that have strong built in AJAX support, I strongly believe that raw CSS + JQuery + JavaScript + JSON has taken the lead in the interactive web app UI development domain.

  7. No Perfect Web Framework[ Go to top ]

    Holy crap, Wordpress? Perfect?

    Just last week I instaled a multisite wordpress and after 2 days, URls and contents of weblogs were swapped!!!!

    Why? I am not even sure. Perhaps a crappy plugin did that? or the software itself?

     

     

  8. No Perfect Web Framework[ Go to top ]

    Holy crap, Wordpress? Perfect?

    Just last week I instaled a multisite wordpress and after 2 days, URls and contents of weblogs were swapped!!!!

    Why? I am not even sure. Perhaps a crappy plugin did that? or the software itself?

     

    Nowhere in the post did I say Wordpress was perfect - my point was merely that for read/render only websites, I'd be more inclinded to look at a publishing framework/platform than try to roll my own solution with a web framework.

    Why reinvent the wheel for a problem others have tried to address so many times before?

  9. Unfortunate emphasis[ Go to top ]

    As the author of the blog post, I think it's a bit unfortunate that my little in-joke/jab at JSF and Struts detracted so much from the core point and subject of the post. Maybe my mistake in even having it there, nonetheless, JSF and Struts had very little to do with the actual point of the post.

    A somewhat more nuanced response to the reactions to JSF and Struts as such: http://blog.recursivity.com/post/1660423087/what-cato-the-elder-has-to-do-with-my-views-on-jsf