In some implementations, I've seen jsp's using java bean classes acting as an intermediate store/data access layer to get data from a jcr.
Why is this, since the jsp can access the jcr directly via the jcr api.
Separation of concerns? Memory cache for the data?
Just wondering why such a pattern exists when the jcr api was written in the first place.
Using scriptlet's might not be so problematic in smaller installations but is in large multi site projects.
Separating UI code and model/business logic eases maintainability and allows reusability of code upon projects. Also changing layout's gets much easier. Usually this seperation is done by using a component bean to access the JCR repo and to provide the data and by using the JSP just for the view.
Just imagine that your customer requires a large UI change propably in multiple sites. It's harder to change JSPs mixed up with scriptlets and UI code, especially if you have a lot of them.
From an OO perspective using JSPs and scriptlets prevents you from using inheritance and composition. Scriptlet's can not be made abstract.
I experienced that java beans are easier to debug then scriptlets, especially in case of an exception and java beans can be easier unit tested.
Related
If given an option to use Sling Models or WCM use class which one should be preferred when and why?
Is either of them better performance wise?
Thanks in Advance
Sling models are saving you a lot of time for accessing simple objects as the current page/resource, injecting some properties or services, adapting from resource or sling http request to your model. Sure with the use the plain API your code will execute a little bit faster, because you initialize only the objects you really need, but you have to do all that things "manually". I think that this sightly introduction is giving a good overview of all possible implementation you can go with. You can also have a look at the sightly official documentation. Below you can find a quick overview of the what you can expect and hopefully make your decision easier (quoted from the offical sightly documentation).
Java Use Provider
Advantages
Use-objects provided through bundles:
faster to initialise and execute than Sling Models for similar code
easy to extend from other similar Use-objects
simple setup for unit testing
Use-objects backed by Resources:
faster to initialise and execute than Sling Models for similar code
easy to override from inheriting components through search path
overlay or by using the sling:resourceSuperType property, allowing
for greater flexibility
business logic for components sits next to the Sightly scripts where
the objects are used
Disadvantages
Use-objects provided through bundles:
lacks flexibility in terms of component overlaying
Use-objects backed by Resources:
cannot extend other Java objects
the Java project might need a different setup to allow running unit
tests, since the objects will be deployed like content
Sling Models Use Provider
Advantages
convenient injection annotations for data retrieval
easy to extend from other Sling Models
simple setup for unit testing
Disadvantages
lacks flexibility in terms of component overlaying, relying on
service.ranking configurations
If you ask me I would always take a framework as sling models or slice which makes the development easier and faster. At the end the performance impact by using a framework is not really a problem, would be not the only one third party framework in the project. But if your project is performance oriented probably you could make some tests with all possibilities you have and decide if such a framework suits your needs (or just mix both).
In short, how do you transfer semantic data between client and server with GWT and which frameworks do you use? Read on for more details that I've thought about.
For example, using GWT 2.2.0 features like the RequestFactory will bring the constraint to have java beans transferred while the semantic resources are represented as triples and a resource can have a varying set of properties. So the RequestFactory itself cannot be shaped to transfer semantic-driven data easily.
A way to do that would be to use RequestFactory with beans that represent triples. Such bean would have 3 properties: subject, predicate, object. These beans will be transferred to client which will know to query, change their properties and then send them to server. This approach will however need a custom implementation(there are no GWT-based frameworks to represent semantic data on client-side, from what I've searched so far) and that could prove buggy or unoptimized. I've seen this approach in this project: http://code.google.com/p/gwt-odb-ui/ - it used GWT-RPC and implements some classes that represent semantic resources. However, I think it's in an incipient stage so I'm reluctant to copy their model.
Also, I've found that Restlets is a framework that supports the semantic web approach to applications. However, there is no documentation or an example on how to use Restlets with Semantic Web and perhaps with GWT. Also, Restlets is also supporting GWT. Does anyone know if this is a viable solution or not?
Thank you!
Restlet should work quite well for you. It has a GWT edition able to automatically serialize your triple beans. In addition, it also comes with an org.restlet.ext.rdf extension, including a Link class similar to your triple bean idea.
For further documentation, I would suggest the "Restlet in Action" book which covers GWT and the semantic web from a Restlet and REST point of view.
My question is very simple, my intention is to generate a repository with your responses so it could serve to the community when selecting frameworks for developing enterprise general purpose applications.
This could apply very well for general purpose languages such as C++, C# or Java.
What Framework do you recommend for generating Layered Architectures?
Based on you experience why do you prefer the usage of some Framework versus your own architecture?
How long do you believe your selected Framework will stay as a preferred option in the software development industry?
This is indeed an overly general question, especially since there are so many interpretations of the very word framework, and within the world of frameworks many different kinds for different tasks. Nevertheless, I'll give it a shot for Java.
Java
Java EE
The default overall enterprise framework of Java is called Java EE. Java EE strongly emphasis a layered architecture. It's a quite large framework and learning every aspect of it can take some time. It supports several types of applications. Extremely small and simple ones may only use JSP files with some scriptlets, while larger ones may use much more.
Java EE doesn't really enforce you to use all parts of it, but you pick and choose what you like.
Top down it consists of the following parts:
Web layer
For the web layer Java EE primarily defines a component and MVC based Web Framework called JSF - JavaServer Faces. JSF utilizes an XML based view description language (templating language) called Facelets. Pages are created by defining templates and letting template clients provide content for them, including other facelets and finally placing components and general markup on them.
JSF provides a well defined life-cyle for doing all the things that every web app should do: converting request values, validating them, calling out to business logic (the model) and finally delegating to a (Facelets) view for rendering.
For a more elaborate description look up some of the articles by BalusC here, e.g. What are the main disadvantages of Java Server Faces 2.0?
Business layer
The business layer in the Java EE framework is represented by a light-weight business component framework called EJB - Enterprise JavaBeans. EJBs are supposed to contain the pure business logic of an application. Among others EJBs take care of transactions, concurrency and when needed remoting.
An ordinary Java class becomes an EJB by applying the #Stateless annotation. By default, every method of that bean is then automatically transactional. Meaning, if the method is called and no transaction is active one is started, otherwise one is joined. If needed this behavior can be tuned or even disabled. In the majority of cases transactions will be transparent to the programmer, but if needed there is an explicit API in Java EE to manage them manually. This is the JTA API - Java Transaction API.
Methods on an EJB can easily be made to execute asynchronous by using the #Asynchronous annotation.
Java EE explicitly supports layering via the concept of a separate module specifically for EJBs. This isolates those beans and prevents them from accessing their higher layer. See this Packaging EJB in JavaEE 6 WAR vs EAR for a more elaborate explanation.
Persistence layer
For persistence the Java EE framework comes with a standard ORM framework called JPA - Java Persistence API. This is based on annotating plain java classes with the #Entity annotation and a property or field on them with #Id. Optionally (if needed) further information can be specified via annotations on how objects and object relations map to a relational database.
JPA heavily emphasizes slim entities. This means the entities themselves are as much as possible POJOs that can be easily send to other layers and even remote clients. An entity in Java EE typically does not take care of its own persistence (i.e. it does not hold any references to DB connections and such). Instead, a separate class called the EntityManager is provided to work with entities.
The most convenient way of working with this EntityManager is from within an EJB bean, which makes obtaining an instance and the handling of transactions a breeze. However, using JPA in any other layer, even outside the framework (e.g. in Java SE) is supported as well.
These are the most important services related to the traditional layers in a typical enterprise app, but the Java EE framework supports a great many additional services. Some of which are:
Messaging
Messaging is directly supported in the Java EE framework via the JMS API - Java Messaging Service. This allows business code to send messages to so-called queues and topics. Various parts of the application or even remote applications can listen to such a queue or topic.
The EJB component framework even has a type of bean that is specifically tailored for messaging; the message driven bean which has a onMessage method that is automatically invoked when a new message for the queue or topic that the bean is listening to comes in.
Next to JMS, Java EE also provides an event-bus, which is a simple light-weight alternative to full blown messaging. This is provided via the CDI API, which is a comprehensive API that among others provides scopes for the web layer and takes care of dependency injections. Being a rather new API it currently partially overlaps with EJB and the so-called managed beans from JSF.
Remoting
Java EE provides a lot of options for remoting out of the box. EJBs can be exposed to external code willing and able to communicate via a binary protocol by merely letting them implement a remote interface.
If binary communication is not an option, Java EE also provides various web service implementations. This is done via among others JAX-WS (web services, soap) and JAX-RS (Rest).
Scheduling
For scheduling periodic or timed jobs, Java EE offers a simple timer API. This API supports CRON-like timers using natural language, as well as timers for delayed execution of code or follow up checks.
This part of Java EE is usable but as mentioned fairly basic.
There are quite some more things in Java EE, but I think this about covers the most important things.
Spring
An alternative enterprise framework for Java is Spring. This is a proprietary, though fully open source framework.
Just as the Java EE framework, the Spring framework contains a web framework (called Spring MVC), a business component framework (simply called Spring, or Core Spring Framework) and a web services stack (called Spring Web Services).
Although many parts of the Java EE framework can be used standalone, Spring puts more emphasis on building up your own stack than Java EE does.
The choice of Java EE vs Spring is often a religiously influenced one. Technically both frameworks offer a similar programming model and a comparable amount of features. Java EE may be seen as slightly more light-weight (emphasis convention over configuration) and having the benefit of type-safe injections, while Spring may offer more of those smaller convenience methods that developers often need.
Additionally Spring offers a more thoroughly and directly usable security API (called Spring Security), where Java EE leaves a lot of security details open to (third party) vendors.
To specifically answer the second question:
Developing your own framework gives you the burden of having to maintain it and educating new developers in using it.
The larger your framework becomes, the more time you have to devote specifically to it and the less time you thus have to solve your actual business problem. This is okay if your business problem is the framework, but otherwise it can become a bit of a problem, even for very large companies that can dedicate a group of people to such a framework.
If you're a smaller company (say ~15 developer max) this can really become a huge burden.
Additionally, if your own framework is the kind of framework that can take advantage of third party developments (e.g. third parties can develop components for JSF), then your own framework obviously won't be able to take advantage of that.
Unless of course you open source your own framework, but this will only significantly increase the burden of supporting it. Just dumping your source code on sourceforge does not really count. You will have to actively support it. All of a sudden your framework becomes their framework with maybe 'weird' feature requests and awkward error reports for environments that you have no personal interest in.
This also assumes that your framework will actually be used by external users. Unless it's really very, very, good and you put lots of energy in it, this will probably not happen if it's simply the umpteenth Java web- or ORM framework.
Obviously, some people have to take up the job of creating new frameworks, otherwise the industry just stagnates, but if your prime concern is your business problem I would really think twice of starting your own framework.
Very vague question, I'm not really sure it's ever a good idea to "write your own" at this point for a work project (unless writing your own, IS the project). If it's a learning exercise, fine, but otherwise go use one of the libraries written by people who have been doing it far longer. If you really want to get involved, read their code, try and contribute patches etc.
For .Net there is Sharp Architecture Which is a pretty popular framework for layered applications.
Here's some of the stuff I use (I don't use Sharp Architecture)
First, the infrastructure stuff
For Dependency Injection, I use StructureMap. I use it because it's way more robust and performant than anything I would or could write, and it's very well supported within the .Net community. It also sticks to being DI, and doesn't venture out into other things that I might want to use other libs for (AOP etc). The fluent configuration is fantastic (but many .Net DI Tools have that now)
For AOP, I use Linfu Dynamic Proxy. I know a lot of people that like the code weaver variety for performance reasons, but that's always seemed a bit like premature optimization to me.
For a DataMapper, I use AutoMapper. This is one where I'm on again off again. If you can do your mappings based just on convention, then great, I'll use it. Once I have to start tweaking the configuration to do special things.... to me that starts to get into the gray area where the code might be more clear with just some left=>right wrapped in a function.
Web/UI
Asp.Net MVC. Although to be quite honest, I'm having a falling out lately and may soon be moving to FubuMvc. Asp.Net MVC seems like it has split personalities in terms of API design (dynamic over here, static over there, using blocks to render forms, but System.Actions to render other things etc). Combine that with the fact that it's not really OSS (you can't submit a patch), and to me there's a compelling reason why the community should come up with something better that's OSS.
Persistence
NHibernate, Specifically Fluent NHibernate. Sure I'd love to write my own OR/M, but at the same time I'm certain that the hordes of developers who have worked on NHibernate are way smarter than me.
Services/Distribution etc
WCF for Synchronous calls
NServiceBus for Messaging and most async calls.
Most of this stuff is OSS, so how long will it be around, well, I would imagine a good long while.
This question doesn't work very well. Selecting frameworks is difficult, and very context specific. For each selection process you might end up with a simple shortlist and a simple list of questions to answer, but those lists do not transfer well to other selections.
The number of parameters and the parameter sensitivity influencing a decision is very large, and at enterprise level a lot of them are not technical.
Currently, there are no frameworks available that are ready to support these near-term enterprise needs:
the switch for most of the workforce from pc to tablet and phone;
the switch from web client and rdbms to p2p/disconnected based storage and distribution
Still wresting with GWT and App Engine, and I have come to this problem:
I have an app engine populated with various data, which I would like to present on the client using a GWT RPC.
I have found out the hard way that, because my Model objects are annotated with JDO, i can't just send them back to the client because they aren't serializable. This means I'm going to have to create a layer of intermediate classes to extract data from my model objects, and send it back to the client to use asynchronously.
I am wondering though, it is possible to construct a GWT object in a servlet and send it back to be used? For example, the servlet would be receive my asynchronous request, pull out the data i want from the database, create a GWT VerticalPanel() with appropriate child elements for the data, and send that VerticalPanel back to the client to be injected.
My understanding of the Java / Javascript interaction that is going on here is still foggy, and I'm thinking that sending a Java object that is not compiled to Javascript after the application is deplyed will not work. Can anybody clarify this for me?
No the server can't create GWT UI objects (like vertical panels) to be used in the presentation layer, nor should it, that's why it's called a 'server' and a 'presentation layer' one serves the data and handles all the business logic, the other displays things on a screen and allows a user to interact with them.
You can however send your JPA annotated POJO's to the front end just fine (we do it in all our applications). You simply need to include the source code for the annotations themselves so that GWT knows how to compile them. You also need to make sure your POJOs's are in a package that is referenced by a NameOfXmlFile.gwt.xml file, eg:
<module>
<inherits name='com.google.gwt.user.User'/>
<source path="domain" />
</module>
This file in my case is in a folder above a package called 'domain' where all my JPA annotated POJO's live. Then in your client side you tell it to inherit that .gwt.xml file:
<module>
<inherits name='com.google.gwt.user.User'/>
<!-- Domain layer references -->
<inherits name='your.package.structure.NameOfXmlFile'/>
</module>
There are restrictions on what you can put in those classes (like for example BigDecimal is not supported, etc) but anything that can be compiled by the GWT compiler (and JPA annotations certainly can be) can be sent without needing any kind of transfer objects. This is one of the real strengths of GWT, that you can use the same JPA Pojos in your entire application, without ever needing to create any other similar object.
Edit: I just noticed you said JDO and not JPA. I assume the same applies there as well though if they are just annotations?
I've seen good answers, so I won't repeat them myself..
Anyway my simple but vital suggestion is: the only way to go is through POJO objects.. BUT IMHO to avoid problems, remember that your POJO objects SHOULD be really PLAIN
Anyway, I can suggest you also a little framework I recently did (few hours of work, so don't expect a rocket!).
It is pojo-injector: http://code.google.com/p/pojo-injector
It helps you in translating your data models to POJO and back... It's based on annotations (only on the POJO side!).
I hope it can help.
This is (imho) one of the problems with GWT.
Basically in Java Web applications it's pretty common to have data or domain objects (which would be your JDO objects) and presentation objects, which are sent to the view. Some go much further than this and can have many more layers of abstraction ("go ahead, add one more layer").
I can see the argument for this but it adds a lot of boilerplate as you translate objects between layers.
Anyway, in GWT you need to do this if your domain objects are POJOs (and as with JPA, even though they claim to be POJOs, the annotations make them not so in reality).
GWT will do this for you on objects returned by your RPC interface but there are certain classes you can't use (eg BigDecimal) as there is no Javascript equivalent (so to use BigDecimals you pass Strings around to construct BigDecimals yourself on the serverside when you ened them and convert them back to Strings when you send them to the client).
I have a backend system which i access via a REST based API and i am returned a resource. This is an EMF resource (an XMI representation). The problem is that i cannot, at design time, assume the metamodel for this resource - as the metamodel in the backend system can change without notice.
I am wondering if i can, first, read the metamodel (the .ecore file) from the backend, generate the code and then, read the models. This will, admittedly, be slower, but i will have to read the metamodel only once per session and this will not make me commit to a fixed metamodel. Will this work? Or is there a better way to achieve what i want?
Also, will this work for the UI? Can i generate the editor code at runtime (EMF.Edit), just before reading the model from the backend and display the model with the appropriate visualization?
Would Dynamic EMF help solve my problem?
Using EMF to generate code from models on the fly sounds hairy. Especially when you turn around and run it. But I guess it would work provided that you run it in a new Eclipse instance.
Dynamic EMF is a possible alternative. However applications that use the dynamic approach are more difficult to write and tend to require more debugging. (By using dynamic EMF you sacrifice a lot of static type safety.) And I'm not sure about the model editor issue.
Actually, I'm a little bit puzzled how you would use the generated Java classes for an in-memory model instance. If the metamodel is changing, then so are the signatures of the generated classes. How can you write code to work against an API that changes all the time? If you say "I generate it" consider that your generator has to use dynamic EMF.
If I were you, I'd ask on the EMF mailing lists. In my experience, if you ask sensible questions (i.e. that are not too vague and/or speculative) you'll get reasonable answers.