I googled around and learned that Lift encourages view-first development, lazy loading of entities, perfectly interactive wizards and validators, built-in comet etc.
It seems to cover the territory of Backbone.js and its client-side (MVC) interactive rendering brethren (and also some interactive features of jQuery).
Does Lift make a lot of Javascript needed for (two-way) interactive web apps redundant, by being mostly self-contained? Where would I still need to apply Javascript libraries?
Lift uses jQuery (or YUI if you want) to do the client side interactions (Ajax, comet). But you don't see that most of the time. You can of course write JavaScript on the client side and call those functions from your server code using Lift.
If you really want to use frameworks like Backbone.js you can do that, and then use Lift as a REST backend.
But in general, if you want your application to perform some comet style updates or Ajax, Using Lift will save you a lot of time and headaches. And if you want full control over the JavaScript, you can get that too.
Related
I own a Play 2.1 application.
Initially, I used the default template mechanisms from Play 2.1 until I .. learned AngularJS.
Now, I clearly want my client side to be an AngularJS app.
However, while surfing the net, I find there are no clear way to achieve it:
Letting Play behave as a simple RESTful application (deleting the view folder) and making a totally distinct project to build the view (AngularJS app initialized by grunt.js).
Advantage: Likely to be less messy, and front and backend teams would work easily separately.
Drawback: Need another HTTP server for the AngularJS app.
Try to totally integrate AngularJS app with the traditional Play's workflow.
Drawback: With a pretty complex framework like AngularJS, it would lead to a confusion of templates managementfor instance : scala.html (for Play) / tpl.html (for Angular) ... => messy.
Making a custom folder within the play project but distinct from the initial folders created by the Play scaffolding. Let's call it myangularview instead of traditional view for instance. Then, publish static contents generated by grunt.js into the Play's public folder, in order to be reachable from browser through Play's routing.
Advantage: SRP between components is still fairly respected and no need to use another light HTTP server for the client-side like in 1.
I pointed out my own views of advantage and drawbacks.
What would be a great way to achieve the combination of Play with Angular?
Yes, I'm answering to my own question :)
I came across this way of doing:
http://jeff.konowit.ch/posts/yeoman-rails-angular/
Rails?? No matter the framework is, the need remains exactly same.
It advocates a real separation between APIs (backend side), and front-end side (in this case making AJAX calls to backend server).
Thus, what I've learned is:
During development phase, a developer would use two servers: localhost on two distinct ports.
During production phase, the front-end elements would be encompassed into the whole backend side (the article would deal with a kind public folder, aiming to serve static contents: HTML, angular templates (for instance), CSS etc... Advantage? => dealing with a one and unique serving server's APIs exposition as well as static assets for the UI.
With this organization, some tools like Yeoman would be able to bring some really awesome handy things to developers like for instance: the livereload feature. :):)
Of course, during development phase, we end up with two different domains, (localhost:3000 and localhost:9000 for instance) causing issues for traditional ajax requests. Then, as the article points out, a proxy may be really useful.
I really find this whole practice very elegant and pleasant to work with.
There was an interesting discussion on the play mailinglist a couple of days ago about frontend-stack/solution, could be something in it for you, quite some people using angular it seems: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/play-framework/frontend/play-framework/IKdOowvRH0s/tQsD9zp--5oJ
First off, I've never used GWT before. I have good experience in HTML/CSS/JS/JSP.
I'm looking for people's opinions on the suitability of Google Web Toolkit for a brand new web app I'm developing.
A big requirement is that the UI is attractive and well designed (Does not look like a clunky Java/Swing App).
It should look like any typical HTML/CSS/JS based modern website.
It is an internal company application so no SEO is required.
JSF is not an option.
The web app frameworks used will be Spring Webflow and Spring MVC. It will use lightweight controllers to communicate with a service layer.
Would Spring Tiles combined with JSP be an easier or more flexible option than GWT for what I am trying to achieve?
Advantages/Disadvantages of GWT and other options welcome.
Thanks
Advantages of GWT
You don't really need to know any JavaScript, since all your client side code will be in Java
This is usually the main reason people go for GWT. They're backend developers who know Java but don't know Javascript, and they don't really want to learn it. Still, you should be careful about this. GWT is a very complete and complex framework with many concepts that are specific to GWT. Even though you'll be coding in Java you will still have to go through many tutorials and documentation before you can build a clean GWT app
Ready to use widgets, like date pickers, dynamic tables, layout panels, popups
It's not really specific to GWT. Other front end framework, like jQuery or Dojo or whatever also give you these. You can have a look at the GWT Showcase to see what GWT has to offer.
GWT takes care of a lot of complex and potentially dangerous stuff for you.
Stuff like Cross-Browser Support, Internationalization, Image and static resources bundling, Front end security, Ajax communication with a server, Events and MVP (just like MVC) framework support. Have a look at the documentation, it is very well done and very thorough.
Debugging is easy
GWT has two different 'modes'. When you're building your app for production, gwt will compile all the java code for the front-end that you wrote into javascript. This javascript will be executed in your clients' browsers. But when you're developping, you can run your app without compiling your java code to javascript. This lets you use a debugger to debug your interface. It's a very good tool.
Disadvantages of GWT
As I said before, GWT is a full framework, with concepts specific to it. Don't think that just because it's in java and you know java that you won't have to learn new stuff.
Interfacing GWT with back end frameworks is not easy
The most common way for your GWT client code to communicate with a server is by using GWT RPC mechanism. It means that you will need to have servlets that implement specific interfaces. You should definetly read the docs on client-server communication to see if that fits well with Spring. A search on SO or Google should give you pointers to setup your application.
I like what I read about Lift, and I like the concept of Dart, but have little experience in both to be able to decide if thinking about using them in the same project is even making sense.
I want both writing structured client side code, and not having to worry about the OWASP top 10 as much
Can they work together? Does it make sense at all? Did anyone try?
I have integrated Dart with Lift using REST services together with Dart's XmlHTTPRequest and liked the result. I would say that any web framework that makes making RESTful services as easy as Lift does is a perfect match for Dart. On the other hand web frameworks such as JSF which requires components to take part of a advanced life cycle are probably not a good fit.
That being said, having the same language on the client and the server side is definitely a win, so when the Dart VM matures a bit more and starts to include RESTful functionality similar to what Express does for NodeJS then I would probably use that instead.
Already now baby steps are being taken for including HTTP support in Dart semilar to what Node provides on V8. Another important point for Dart is that it allows the browser and server to share rich objects, like what GWT does for Java, and this should further ease building advanced web applications with Dart.
Good day. I'm still learning GWT so please help me. I'm working on a project - Web Application with GWT on the Client Side. This app has lots of CRUD operations so I'd like to make a model for this. Can anyone suggest a prototype for my CRUD class?
CRUD on this app goes something like this:
When I clicked the Details button in a module, a popup will be shown that allows the user to do CRUD operations. This popup do have the module title, info on the selected item, and the buttons - Edit, New, Delete.
I have already finished building the base GUI for this project but I'm just starting to work on each module. I choose to begin on those module with CRUD operations. So, please help me and give your ideas on this project. Thanks in advance :)
Your question is a little bit general.
You probably have to deal with two questions which can be handled separately:
Communication with the backend.
GUI for CRUD operations
Communication with the backend:
It depends on which kind of backend you are using.
Java-backend:
For Java backends the recommended client-server communication protocol is RequestFactory.
Non-Java-backend: In case you are using a non-java backend (python, PHP, etc) you have to use RequestBuilder using JSON or XML (I would recommend JSON).
For mapping JSON/XML to DTO's and vice verca you can use different methods:
Third party tools like piriti which are based on GWT generators
Javascript Overlay Types (JSO)
GWT Autobean framework (which is used by RequestFactory btw).
GUI for CRUD operations
For mapping your DTOs to your UI and doing the CRUD operations you can do it either:
manually
with the Editor framework
I would recommend to use the Editor framework as it reduces the amount of boilerplate code
to move an object from your object graph to the UI and back.
The Editor framework works well with RequestFactory (RequestFactoryEditorDriver), Autobean (SimpleBeanEditorDriver) and Javascript Overlay Types.
We're planning on creating a feedreader as a windows desktop- and iPad application. As we want to be able to show Websites AND to run (our own) JavaScript in this application, we thought about delivering the application as HTML/CSS/JavaScript, just wrapped by some .NET control or a Cocoa Touch webbrowser component. So the task at hand is to find out which framework to use to create the HTML/CSS/JS files to embed in the application.
For the development of the HTML/CSS/JavaScript we would be happy to use Vaadin, GWT, or some other framework, as we're a lot better with Java than with JS. We favor Vaadin after a short brainstorming, as the UI components are very nice, but I fear that most of the heavy lifting will be on the server and not in the client (and that wouldn't be too nice). We would also like GWT, but the Java-to-JS compiling takes a lot of time and an extra step, and slowed down development time in the past when using it.
The question is: which development framework would you choose (given you wanted to implement this project and you mostly did Java so far) and why? If there are better framework options (List of Rich Client Frameworks), please let me know.
Edit: The application will need to talk to our server from time to time (sync what has been read for example), but mainly should get the xml feeds itself. Therefore I hope that most of the generated code can be embedded in the application and there doesn't need to be heavy activity with our server.
Edit2: We (realistically even if you doubt) expect at least 10000 users.
Based on my experience with Vaadin, I'd go for that, but your requirements are somewhat favoring pure-GWT instead.
Vaadin needs the server and server connection. If building mostly offline desktop application, this can be solved with an embedded Jetty for example. (synchronize with an online service only when needed), but for iPad you would need to connect online right away to start the Vaadin application.
GWT runs completely at the client-side and you can build a JavaScript browser application that only connects when needed.
Because Vaadin is much quicker to develop, you could build a small Vaadin version first and see if that is actually problem on the iPad.
On the other hand, if you can assume going online right away, you can skip the local server installation altogether. Just run the application online and implement the desktop version using operating systems default browser control (i.e. the .NET control you suggested). Then Vaadin is easier.
Vaadin is just framework base on GWT but have two very important features:
don't need to run GWT compiler. It is pure java. Of course if not add addons because then gwt compiler must run.
you don't need to write communication code. So you don't need to solve DTO problems, non-serializable object mappings and dont need to write servlets.
I use Vaadin in my work for one year and we haven't performance problems yet (desktop like application with ~500 users). IMO very good solution is to use Vaadin just for UI, logic move to independent beans and connect this two elements using Spring or Guice.
In this case you should use MVP pattern and Domain Driven Development.
Bussines beans is domain objects and logic that use view interfaces to send responses.
Custom Vaadin components (could extends standard components) implements view interfaces.
That way is good when you decide to change UI engine if Vaadin is not for you. Just rewrite guice/spring mappings and write new implementations of view interfaces.
My 3 cents:
If you decide to use vaadin, You will benefit from already GOOD LOOKING components. Since you dont want to write (alot of) CSS , vaadin is already good looking out of the box. How ever, Vaadin is a SERVERSIDE framework. User interface interactions will hit the back end even if they dont involve getting any data (e.g moving from one tab to the other) .
If you decide to use GWT, you will have to atleast style the application (this is not hard) . There is also the problem of long compilation time (but you can test and debug on hosted mode which allows you to run the application without compiling , then you compile only when deploying). The main advantage of gwt is that you control what gets sent to the wire, For UI interactions that dont require getting data from the backend, it will work purely on the client side. You the developer will determine when to send a request to the back end. (Doing RPC requests in GWT is very easy)
Hope this will help you make the decision.