After speaking with developers, I have questions, "What framework do you use with your app?" and "What web technologies are you using on the front end?".
Therefore, in order to answer the exact question they are asking, what is the difference between "frameworks" and "technologies" in this context? How would I answer these two questions differently or do they both have the same answer?
For example, I thought that in a MEAN stack application, the "technologies" I am using are mongoDB, expressJS, angularJS, and nodeJS. What would be the "framework".
Frameworks are a subset of technologies. All computer languages are technologies. All frameworks are written in computer languages to solve specific problems. The MEAN stack consists of many technologies. NodeJS is a web application framework, that allows JavaScript to run on the server. Express is used to create APIs. Angular is typically used on the client side to provide the front end experience. MongoDB is a technology but not a framework, its a piece of software that allows an application to persist data.
Using your example of the MEAN stack, one could argue that a framework such as AngularJS is a subset of a given technology stack. I often think of a framework as a set of tools for ...... you know what, I think an analogy might better express my thoughts on this.
an analogy
construction = development?
Think of a general contractor (you know, the person(s) you call to come fix things around your house/work). So development is a lot like handy-man/construction work. They fix things, we fix things. They make you a new house or kitchen counter, we make applications... yada yada yada
components
Now think about the separate components in making a house:
plumbing
electric
framing
dry wall
roofing
finish work
I'd equate those to the separate things we use in development to serve our end goal:
database
services
client UI
the tools
Just like a plumber has special tools for his job, I view a framework like AngularJS as just another tool to serve the specialty of Client-side UI work. Bootstrap is a styling framework/tool just like a paint-roller is to finish work. The CSS or the Javascript are the nails and screws, but you can't build just a house with nails and screws, you need tools and methodologies to assemble your parts.
I dunno if that is the best analogy, but it's the one I've used for ages in explaining to laypersons what it is I do for my work and it seems to convey the point fairly well.
in closing...
... I think you can get away with the line of thinking that technology encompasses any frameworks you use. And by mentioning a framework (that they are familiar with) you are implying the technology.
This is a part of my course project.
Basically, there are vendors which provide food and at peak hours the queue gets so large that people have to wait long for their order.
Our project is like an online site which will enable users to order food. After ordering the food, the user will get an info as to where does he lie in the queue. This way students can order from their hostel rooms without actually going to the vendor and getting their time wasted by waiting in the line. As soon as the user orders the food, vendor gets notified of the project so that he can start preparing the food.
I am completely new to web development so I am not sure what to use. This project will also work as an exercise to learn about web development.
I have heard about Drupal & Joomla CMS. Also, Django framework is also there and I am actually confused as to what technology to use.
I am also confused as to what is the difference between a framework and a CMS? How do they differ and which one will suit me.
So, how do I go about developing the
application?
A framework is a basic application without any concrete business logic. It contains basic structure and sometimes basic features (like database connectivity and other standard libraries). You have to write your code yourself.
A CMS is a content management system. It is essentially a complete website but without the content. it provides tools to write content (web pages). The most popular ones (like Joomla) come with a bunch of templates too that you can download to give your site any look you want.
A CMS probably doesn't have enough features to provide you with this logic. You will probably need to do some programming to get this done. It may still be useful to use a CMS, though. Lots of them support various plugins that allow you to add these kind of features and still allow you to easily edit regular pages.
Frameworks are libraries turned on their heads. You plug a library into your code; a framework turns this around by abstracting a particular problem in such a way that you plug your code into it to solve a problem. It's the Hollywood principle: "Don't call us; we'll call you."
People who write frameworks have deep knowledge of a particular problem domain. They usually represent the distillation of several attempts to solve a problem, with best practices, clear abstractions, and good plug-in points made clear from long experience.
Django is a Python framework for web applications that have a browser front end and relational databases for persistence.
That's one example of a framework.
A CMS (Content Management System) allows users to dynamically add and manage content in a web application. I think they solve slightly different problems from Django, because it is specialized to the problem of content management.
I'd recommend starting your queuing problem without a front end at all - just text. Concentrate on the subtleties of queuing. Get that right with your object model and then expose a user interface to display it to users.
CMS is a 'content management system'. If provides modules that you can plug in. The end effect is it sets up a website for you, and you have admin pages where you can enter content. For special stuff, you use plugins. If you have to, you can write your own plugins.
A development framework is just a stack of technologies you can use to develop an application. So for example, the Grails framework uses Hibernate(persistence) and Spring(dependency injection and other stuff) under the covers -- it is providing and using existing tools (which are themselves frameworks) which you will in turn use to build the application.
With a framework, you basically start with a bunch of tools in your toolbox, but little or no parts of a running web app out of the box. You have to develop the functionality with the tools. With a CMS system, it's like they have implemented something for you, but it is really generic and you will have to tailor it to your needs.
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 9 years ago.
Can someone please explain me what a software framework is? Why do we need a framework? What does a framework do to make programming easier?
I'm very late to answer it. But, I would like to share one example, which I only thought of today. If I told you to cut a piece of paper with dimensions 5m by 5m, then surely you would do that. But suppose I ask you to cut 1000 pieces of paper of the same dimensions. In this case, you won't do the measuring 1000 times; obviously, you would make a frame of 5m by 5m, and then with the help of it you would be able to cut 1000 pieces of paper in less time. So, what you did was make a framework which would do a specific type of task. Instead of performing the same type of task again and again for the same type of applications, you create a framework having all those facilities together in one nice packet, hence providing the abstraction for your application and more importantly many applications.
Technically, you don't need a framework. If you're making a really really simple site (think of the web back in 1992), you can just do it all with hard-coded HTML and some CSS.
And if you want to make a modern webapp, you don't actually need to use a framework for that, either.
You can instead choose to write all of the logic you need yourself, every time.
You can write your own data-persistence/storage layer, or - if you're too busy - just write custom SQL for every single database access.
You can write your own authentication and session handling layers.
And your own template rending logic.
And your own exception-handling logic.
And your own security functions.
And your own unit test framework to make sure it all works fine.
And your own... [goes on for quite a long time]
Then again, if you do use a framework, you'll be able to benefit from the good, usually peer-reviewed and very well tested work of dozens if not hundreds of other developers, who may well be better than you. You'll get to build what you want rapidly, without having to spend time building or worrying too much about the infrastructure items listed above.
You can get more done in less time, and know that the framework code you're using or extending is very likely to be done better than you doing it all yourself.
And the cost of this? Investing some time learning the framework. But - as virtually every web dev out there will attest - it's definitely worth the time spent learning to get massive (really, massive) benefits from using whatever framework you choose.
The summary at Wikipedia (Software Framework) (first google hit btw) explains it quite well:
A software framework, in computer programming, is an abstraction in which common code providing generic functionality can be selectively overridden or specialized by user code providing specific functionality. Frameworks are a special case of software libraries in that they are reusable abstractions of code wrapped in a well-defined Application programming interface (API), yet they contain some key distinguishing features that separate them from normal libraries.
Software frameworks have these distinguishing features that separate them from libraries or normal user applications:
inversion of control - In a framework, unlike in libraries or normal user applications, the overall program's flow of control is not dictated by the caller, but by the framework.[1]
default behavior - A framework has a default behavior. This default behavior must actually be some useful behavior and not a series of no-ops.
extensibility - A framework can be extended by the user usually by selective overriding or specialized by user code providing specific functionality.
non-modifiable framework code - The framework code, in general, is not allowed to be modified. Users can extend the framework, but not modify its code.
You may "need" it because it may provide you with a great shortcut when developing applications, since it contains lots of already written and tested functionality. The reason is quite similar to the reason we use software libraries.
A lot of good answers already, but let me see if I can give you another viewpoint.
Simplifying things by quite a bit, you can view a framework as an application that is complete except for the actual functionality. You plug in the functionality and PRESTO! you have an application.
Consider, say, a GUI framework. The framework contains everything you need to make an application. Indeed you can often trivially make a minimal application with very few lines of source that does absolutely nothing -- but it does give you window management, sub-window management, menus, button bars, etc. That's the framework side of things. By adding your application functionality and "plugging it in" to the right places in the framework you turn this empty app that does nothing more than window management, etc. into a real, full-blown application.
There are similar types of frameworks for web apps, for server-side apps, etc. In each case the framework provides the bulk of the tedious, repetitive code (hopefully) while you provide the actual problem domain functionality. (This is the ideal. In reality, of course, the success of the framework is highly variable.)
I stress again that this is the simplified view of what a framework is. I'm not using scary terms like "Inversion of Control" and the like although most frameworks have such scary concepts built-in. Since you're a beginner, I thought I'd spare you the jargon and go with an easy simile.
I'm not sure there's a clear-cut definition of "framework". Sometimes a large set of libraries is called a framework, but I think the typical use of the word is closer to the definition aioobe brought.
This very nice article sums up the difference between just a set of libraries and a framework:
A framework can be defined as a set of libraries that say “Don’t call us, we’ll call you.”
How does a framework help you? Because instead of writing something from scratch, you basically just extend a given, working application. You get a lot of productivity this way - sometimes the resulting application can be far more elaborate than you could have done on your own in the same time frame - but you usually trade in a lot of flexibility.
A simple explanation is: A framework is a scaffold that you can you build applications around.
A framework generally provides some base functionality which you can use and extend to make more complex applications from, there are frameworks for all sorts of things. Microsofts MVC framework is a good example of this. It provides everything you need to get off the ground building website using the MVC pattern, it handles web requests, routes and the like. All you have to do is implement "Controllers" and provide "Views" which are two constructs defined by the MVC framework. The MVC framework then handles calling your controllers and rendering your views.
Perhaps not the best wording but I hope it helps
at the lowest level, a framework is an environment, where you are given a set of tools to work with
this tools come in the form of libraries, configuration files, etc.
this so-called "environment" provides you with the basic setup (error reportings, log files, language settings, etc)...which can be modified,extended and built upon.
People actually do not need frameworks, it's just a matter of wanting to save time, and others just a matter of personal preferences.
People will justify that with a framework, you don't have to code from scratch. But those are just people confusing libraries with frameworks.
I'm not being biased here, I am actually using a framework right now.
In General, A frame Work is real or Conceptual structure of intended to serve as a support or Guide for the building some thing that expands the structure into something useful...
A framework provides functionalities/solution to the particular problem area.
Definition from wiki:
A software framework, in computer
programming, is an abstraction in
which common code providing generic
functionality can be selectively
overridden or specialized by user code
providing specific functionality.
Frameworks are a special case of
software libraries in that they are
reusable abstractions of code wrapped
in a well-defined Application
programming interface (API), yet they
contain some key distinguishing
features that separate them from
normal libraries.
A framework helps us about using the "already created", a metaphore can be like,
think that earth material is the programming language,
and for example "a camera" is the program, and you decided to create a notebook. You don't need to recreate the camera everytime, you just use the earth framework (for example to a technology store) take the camera and integrate it to your notebook.
A framework has some functions that you may need. you maybe need some sort of arrays that have inbuilt sorting mechanisms. Or maybe you need a window where you want to place some controls, all that you can find in a framework. it's a kind of WORK that spans a FRAME around your own work.
EDIT:
OK I m about to dig what you guys were trying to tell me ;) you perhaps havent noticed the information between the lines "WORK that spans a FRAME around ..."
before this is getting fallen deeper n deeper. I try to give a floor to it hoping you're gracfully:
a good explanation to the question "Difference between a Library and a Framework" I found here
http://ifacethoughts.net/2007/06/04/difference-between-a-library-and-a-framework/
Beyond definitions, which are sometimes understandable only if you already understand, an example helped me.
I think I got a glimmer of understanding when loooking at sorting a list in .Net; an example of a framework providing a functionality that's tailored by user code providing specific functionality. Take List.Sort(IComparer). The sort algorithm, which resides in the .Net framework in the Sort method, needs to do a series of compares; does object A come before or after object B? But Sort itself has no clue how to do the compare; only the type being sorted knows that. You couldn't write a comparison sort algorithm that can be reused by many users and anticipate all the various types you'd be called upon to sort. You've got to leave that bit of work up to the user itself. So here, sort, aka the framework, calls back to a method in the user code, the type being sorted so it can do the compare. (Or a delegate can be used; same point.)
Did I get this right?
I always designed/developed/released a software or web project myself/independent activity using java/vb.net and php (intermediate level of experience). But recently i have to work in a company with team of 5+ using Zend or Cakephp.
Q. My question is how do you work using php frameworks in team and all those SVN staffs?
10 ppls will make one class? or one module? or one front page? How is it made or gets implemented, in most cases? Can someone explain in details.
Thanks in advance.
My advice would be to map work/resources to features, not to implementation. There are a lot of reasons for this, but here are the ones I think are key:
You'll communicate better with business types because your organization and work maps to their functionality.
Many, and perhaps most, technical components will play some role in multiple features. It's much easier, IMO, to have many hands operating on one source file than to have one hand operating across multiple business functions/features. A good SCM will help with problems arising from the former.
This doesn't eliminate, negate or trivialize the need for good internal communication, though. Tech teams must communicate effectively where cross-cutting concerns are identified.
Update: This question was inspired by my larger quest for mapping ontologically the whole software systems architecture enchilada. I've written a blog post about it, and hopefully it will help clarify what I'm after.
Many, many, many frameworks and stacks that's event-driven have too much variation for my little head to get around. Is there somewhere some resources that defines the outline of a reasonable Application Event Model, what events there are, and what triggers are most common?
I've got my own framework with a plugin and event-driven architecture, but I want to open-source it, and as such would like to make it closer to some common ground as not to alienate people.
So to clarify; this is for an application, meaning setting up the environment, the dependencies, the data sources (like databases), and being a MVC framework setting up the model, the view, launching controllers / actions, and in the GUI various stages of the interface (header, content, columns, etc.).
Ideas? Thoughts? Pointers? (And I've made it language and platform neutral at this point)
I read your blog entry, which btw I found an extremely interesting read, but... this question does not seem to reflect the broadness of the issue you are presenting there.
What you are after is very abstract and theoretical. What I mean to say is that if you tie any of those ideas to actual technology you will find yourself 'stuck' with it. This is why many of us are reluctant to use any framework. Especially the 'relabeled' products suddenly claiming to conform to the trend. We choose mainly on the basis of what appears to be needed to reach a predetermined result.
Frameworks (or tools in general) that target the application architecture domain distinguish themselves primarily by the amount of responsibility they are designed to take on. Spring for example only deals with the concept of decoupling and is therefore easily adopted and useable in many situations. The quality of any framework is expressed in terms of how well the designers of such frameworks were able to keep their products within the boundaries of that responsibility. Some front-to-end products will do exactly the opposite, code generators being among the 'worst' of them.
To answer your question at the top of this page, I do not think there is a framework that does what you want at this time and I do not think there is a single model of how applications (should) work. Keep in mind though that the application architecture domain deals with technology more than it does with concepts. In other words: If it works and meets the requirements, then you're pretty much done.
That said, you might find something of value in agent-based systems.
Heh. Most developers pick the major framework they like the tools for and stick with it. That's usually the winning strategy. I sympathize with your desire not to marry a single vendor.
Keep in mind however, that in developing your own framework, you're going to end up tied to a single vendor anyway. :-)
Is there somewhere some resources that defines the outline of a reasonable
Application Event Model, what events there are, and what triggers are most common?
I don't think so.
From what I see, there are two kinds of models out there: those with a real framework with which you can make a working data entry dialog, and abstract meta-meta-models that are optimized for modeling themselves.
Try surveying a few current frameworks that have good documentation online and cross-reference the major terminology in a spreadsheet. It's an interesting exercise.
I'd have a look at Spring for Java, and the XT Framework Spring module (http://springmodules.dev.java.net/docs/reference/0.9/html/xt.html), which apparently supports event-driven architecture, as starting points. Spring has an MVC framework (inc. convention-based routing to controllers), db configuration (for Hibernate, particularly), plus full dependency injection support. There's also a mechanism in Spring for modularising your web apps, called Spring Slices. And it can be integrated with Jersey for building RESTful apps.
(Unfortunately, I tried to provide links to everything, but this place only lets new users post a single link. So you'll have to do some googling :) )