Related
I am into designing a new iPhone application. My application is will contain almost all iPhone SDK concepts including core data, server integration, location services. Is there any design decisions I should keep in mind?
My plan was to go by designing a controller class for each iPhone app screen and also any utility classes to be used. Any guidance will be really appreciated.
I forget who said this first, but it goes like this: The first project you do in any new technology will probably be very bad!
This is similar to these sage words from Fred Brooks - "Plan to throw one away; you will anyway"
So the best way is to wade right in, get dirty, light up the dark corners and learn what works for you. Then you'll most likely have some very specific questions based on your experiences!
This is a tough subject to talk about generally. Design approaches that work for some will fail for others.
It would probably help to know more about what you are trying to do. For a counter-example, I'm working on a game. I create an OpenGL context and from that moment on I'm managing assets like shaders, textures, mesh data, sounds,... . The way I've designed my project will pretty much be useless to you.
However the best advice that I can come up is to really figure out what you are trying to do. Create mockups of your GUI and document workflows. Do sketches of GUIs. Become an expert in the domain in which you want your application to work. Develop a deep understanding of what you are trying to do.
Once you have the GUI figured out, start working on the other end of the Model-View-Controller approach - figure out what data you need in order to provide the GUI that you've designed. Not all data structures are equal. What's the best data design for the domain you're working on?
Once you have the view and model figured out you need to glue everything together with controllers. There's lots of trick and traps here. Do you use threading to prevent the GUI from blocking? Do you make direct calls to objects or do you decouple and use notifications?
But this is the public appearance of your application. You might want to track usage data - consider what you wish to track and append that to your design. Errors happen, so think how to approach them.
However, it's hard to be more detailed without more details than what you've provided. Every application has it's own quirks and gotchas. It's nearly impossible to talk about this in a general sense.
I have finally decided to hop up on the train of MVC 2.
Now I have been doing a lot of reading lately and following is the architecture which I think will be good enough for most Business Web Applications.
Layered Architecture:-
Model (layer which communicates with Database). EF4
Repository (Layer which communicates with Model and includes all the queries)
Business Layer (Validations, Helper Functions, Calls to repository)
Controllers (Controls the flow of the application and is responsible for providing data to the view from the Business Layer.)
Views (UI)
Now I have decided to create a separate project for each layer (Just to respect the separation of concerns dilemma. Although I know it's not necessary but I think it makes the project look more professional :-)
I am using AutoMetaData t4 template for Validation. I also came across FluentValidation but cant find much on it. Which one should I go with?
Which View Engine to go for?
Razor View Engine Was Love at first sight. But it's still in beta and I think it won't be easy to find examples of it. Am I right?
Spark .. I can't find much on it either and don't want to get stuck somewhere in the middle crying for help when there is no one to listen...:-(
T4 templates auto generate views and I can customize them to generate the views the way I want? Will this be possible with razor and spark or do I have to create them manually?
Is there any way to Auto generate the repositories?
I would really appreciate it if I can see a project based on the architecture above.
Kindly to let me know if it's a good architecture to follow.
I have some confusion on the business layer like is it really necessary?
This is a very broad question. I decided to use Fluent NHibernate's autoconfig feature for a greenfield application, and was quite impressed. A lot of my colleagues use CakePHP, and it needed very little configuration to get it to generate a database schema compatible with the default conventions cake uses, which is great for us.
I highly suggest the book ASP.NET MVC2 in Action. This book does a good job at covering the ecosystem of libraries that are used in making a maintainable ASP.NET MVC application.
As for the choice of view engines, that can depend on your background. I personally prefer my view to look as much like the HTML as possible, so I would choose Spark. On the other hand if you are used to working with ASP.NET classic, the WebForms view engine may get you up and running fastest.
Kindly to let me know if its a good architecture to follow?
It's a fine start - the only thing I would suggest you add is a layer of abstraction between your Business Logic and Data Access (i.e: Dependency Inversion / Injection) - see this: An Introduction to Dependency Inversion.
i know its not necessary but i think it makes the project looks more professional :-)
Ha! Usually you'll find that a lot of "stuff" isn't necessary - right up until the moment when it is, at which point it's usually too late.
Re View Engines: I'm still a newbie to ASP.NET MVC myself and so aren't familiar with the view engines your talking about; if I were you I'd dream up some test scenarios and then try tackling them with each product so you can directly compare them. Often, you need to take things for a test drive to be more comfortable - although this might take time, but it's usually worth it.
Edit:
If i suggest this layer to my PM and give him the above two reasons then i don't think he will accept it
Firstly, PM's are not tech leads (usually); you have responsibility for the design of the solution - not the PM. This isn't uncommon, in my experience most of the time the PM isn't even aware they are encroaching on your turf that isn't theres. It's not that I'm a "political land grabber" but I just tend to think of "separation of concerns" and, well, I'm sure you understand.
As the designer / architect it's up to you to interpret requirements and (taking business priorities into account) come up with solution that provides the best 'platform' going forward.
(Regarding DI) My question is , is it really worth it?
If you put a gun to my head I would say yes, however the real world is a little more complex.
If you answer yes to any of these questions then its more likely using DI would be a good idea:
The system is non-trivial
The expected life of the system is more than (not sure what the right figure is here, there probably isn't one, so I'm going to put a stake in the ground at) 2 years.
The system and/or its requirements are fluid.
Splitting up the work (BL / DAL) into different teams would be advantageous to the project (perhaps you're part of a distributed team).
The system is intended for a market with a diverse technical landscape (e.g: not everyone will want to use MS SQL).
You want to perform quality testing (this would make it easier).
The system is large / complex, so splitting up functionality and putting it into other systems is a possibility.
You want to offer more than one way to store data (say a file based repository for free, and a database driven repository for a fee).
Business drivers / environment are volatile - what if they came to you and said "this is excellent but now we want to offer a cloud-based version, can you put it on Azure?"
Id also like to point out that whilst there's definitely a learning curve involved it's not that huge, and once you're up-to-speed you'll still be at least as fast as you are now; or at worst you;ll take a little longer but you'll be providing much more value (with relatively less effort).
In terms of how much effort is involved...
One-Off Tasks (beyond getting the team up to speed):
Writting a Provider Loader or picking DI Framework. Once you've done this it will be reusable in all your projects.
'New' Common Tasks (assuming you're following the approach taken in the article):
Defining interface (on paper) - this is something you'll be doing right now anyway, except that you might not realise it. Basically it's OO Design, but as it's going to be the formal interface between two or more packages you need to give it some thought (and yes you can still refactor it - but ideally the interface should be "stable" and not change a lot; if it does change it's better to 'add' than to 'remove or change' existing members).
Writting interface code. This is very fast (minutes not hours), as you're not writting any implementation; and when you go to implement you can use tools provided by your IDE to generate code-stubs based on the interface.
Things you do now that you'd do differently:
Instantiating a variable (in your BL classes) to hold the provider, probably via a factory. Writting this shouldn't take long (again, minutes not hours) and it's fairly simple code to copy, paste & refactor where required.
Writing the DAL code: should be the same as before.
Sometimes it is way more easy to learn patterns from code : Sharp Architecture is a concrete implementation of good practices in MVC, using DDD.
I'm struggling with a classic legacy project: manual URL parsing and composition, manual routing etc. Knowing a bit of Catalyst I long for at least some of the concepts, for example proper (a.k.a. transparent) URL routing and parameter parsing for example. Ideally, I'd just use Catalyst and be done with it, but given it's a legacy project, I guess I only have two options:
Somehow use parts of Catalyst in my project -- which I'm not sure is possible. Is it?
Use single modules implementing parts of Catalyst's framework -- what are you experiences, which modules can be recommended?
I have not tried this, but from what I have tried I don't think that it's really a viable option to take a legacy project and "Catalyze" it halfway. I don't think Catalyst is meant to be used in that way, and trying to do so will probably be far more effort than it is worth, especially since you'll be hitting edge cases all over the place that nobody else has any familiarity with (since they don't know about your legacy code).
It's hard enough just getting a legacy project to fit into MVC, without even considering which framework to use. So, IMHO, if you're going to do it, go for a full-assed solution:
If you can separate concerns in the legacy codebase, the effort from that point to getting the project fully under Catalyst is worth it.
If you can't separate concerns in the MVC sense, you aren't going to get any substantial benefit from using Catalyst or parts of it. Your efforts will be better spent on plain ole-fashioned refactoring.
I am a newbie of Zend Framework.
I downloaded the Zend Framework and then followed the official quickstart tutorial to build a very simple registration form. But after that, I find very hard to learn different elements of Zend Framework.
Many tutorials mention frontController and registerAutoload() in the bootstrap file. However, it seems that I can't see it again in the code in version 1.8 (both in the official quickstart tutorial and Getting Started with Zend Framework 1.8). Many tutorials contain the old version of code and it seems very different in v1.8.
I start with writing registration form with password confirmation. I read the official document and find the custom validator for password confirmation. It just puts the class there and doesn't mention how I can use it. I don't know where I should put this file and I can't find any hints in Google. The "class not found" error always makes me sick (I've tried addPrefixElement, set_include_path but they don't work).
User registration, email activation, login, access control are very common tasks. But I don't even find a piece of sample code in v1.8 that I can run in my machine. I am very frustrated about Zend Framework.
Does anyone give me some advices?
I have also just started learning the zend framework. I also find alot of old tutorials that make learning confusing and hard,
but there are some resources that I find help in learning the zend framework:
http://www.zendcasts.com/ - they have tutorials on ZF1.8 already, like Bootstrapping using Zend_Application, etc.
Some useful blogs that might help:
http://weierophinney.net/matthew/
http://www.thomasweidner.com/flatpress/index.php
http://smartycode.com/zf/
http://codeutopia.net/blog/
Forums to ask your questions:
http://www.nabble.com/Zend-Framework-Community-f16154.html - alot of ZF developers seem to be here to answer your questions :) much more than the official Zend Forums below ...
http://forums.zend.com/viewforum.php?f=69
As to class not found, I think you didn't autoload?
http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/zend.loader.autoloader-resource.html
Parts of Zend Framework have changed slightly in the 1.8 release but everything should be backwards compatible so all code example written using the 1.* release series should still work with little or no modification. The main areas that are different are
Zend Loader (related to register_autoload) which now has several improvements related to performance and some slight differences in its API (with a PHP warning if you use the old way). I wouldn't worry about this too much as a beginner - just follow the tutorial or continue to use include/require statements until you become annoyed with adding them all the time!
Zend Application which basically allows you to create your set-up and initialisation code with less fuss. Again, you don't have to use it and you can happily write a manual bootstrap class to get you used to how the framework is put together.
With regards to getting started I would highly recommend getting your head around the Zend Controller component, particularly the front controller part and this diagram.
For authentication look at Zend Auth, for e-mail see Zend Mail, for access control see Zend Acl and for forms and validation see Zend Form, Zend Validate and Zend Filter. The form and validation components will explain about paths and adding your own custom validators and form elements.
The other area of importance is Zend Db which allows you to persist your data to a database. There is also Zend View which represents the view layer in the MVC stack. In my opinion these are the key components of a basic ZF application. From there you can explore the other components as and when you need them.
Don't forget that the Zend Framework is specifically designed to be loosely coupled and it is very easy to use a different component from another project for a particular task. Sometimes it is necessary to write your own components too. If there is a component you would prefer to use over the Zend component then go ahead and do so.
Honestly, the documentation is very good although it is hard to navigate for beginners. Once you get your head around the core components everything will become a lot clearer.
Also try following this tutorial. It will help explain a lot of the basics.
I recommend these video tutorials pu up by a guy called Alex, he keeps them up to date and releases new ones all the time,they are all relevant to ZF 1.8 and 1.9.
He has even a detailed video tutorial covering ACL, login forms etc. (my first steps with Zend were easier thanks to him!)
http://alex-tech-adventures.com/development/zend-framework.html?start=15
- his site is a bit comfusing but worth the time in figuring it out :)
Cheers
Roman
Some tips:
Here is a nice diagram of the Dispatch process
http://nethands.de/download/zenddispatch_en.pdf
It is much easier to understand ZF if you are experienced in OOP / OOP Design Patterns
When I first stumbled across ZF I had little knowledge of OOP. ZF prompted me to learn OOP which was a very good thing.
Distinguish between the 'magic' of ZF and the actual ZF Architecture
Although I have a good understanding of ZF Classes I still get confused when ZF adds its 'magic' to the mix.
When I say 'magic' I am referring to things like
the default objects loaded and used if none specified, and
url-controllername-filepath-filename inflections / naming conventions.
config settings-to-class-instantiation mappings
ZF is a bit like a crack-dealer in the sense that the 'Getting Started Tutorials' get you hooked straight away. They perform so much magic that it makes you think
.oO(Wow - how simple was that! This framework is cool!)
Then as soon as you start to try to do your own thing - the magic starts to get really confusing.
So - my tactic is to remove as much ZF magic as possible. If you have the option to specify a class to use, or a router to use, then specify it. Don't let Zend do it for you.
Then when something weird is happening you can find the bugs more easily.
Also, if you specify the locations of classes/ paths as (opposed to letting ZF magically inflect paths and find scripts), then you do not have to worry about questions of 'where to put this? , where to put that?' - you just put things where you want them to be and explicitly point ZF to them.
As you get more familiar with ZF you might then want to let it take over and do some magic for you. Only then can you really understand why that magic is convenient.
As Tim Wardle said in another answer - favour require statements over zend loader until you really need it.
If you are a PHP design house that churns out 10 website projects a week, then ZF Magic can be really useful. If you are designing your first ZF app - then 'reducing complexity' is a more important design goal than 're-usability'.
Browse the code
It might seem obvious but one of the best ways to learn about the ZF is to look at the code.
Again the ZF magic can get in the way - I often want to look at a method's arguments to discover what i need to pass in only to discover that it expects an ambiguous 'options array' (not exactly helpful). After a while, though, you start to notice the conventions used in how an 'option key' marries up to a getter/setter method. So, keep looking at the code and familiarising yourself with the 'ZF way'.
I 'ope that 'elps.
The Front Range PHP Users Group website has some presentations on Zend Framework which may be of use.
I have so much sympathy with you Billy. I am a newbie and the confusion between the old way and the new way is almost just too much to handle. Also see here for someone who points out some of the main differences:
http://crossfunctional.wordpress.com/2009/05/
All documentation, particularly Zend's documentation is absolutely horrible. It all assumes that you "know" where to put the snippets they are referring to and how they work together. If I already knew those things, I wouldn't need the documentation. No full example applications with authentication etc. that you can download and modify. I'm seriously regretting putting any time into trying to learning this framework. All examples that I can find are apparently for older versions. I followed one for authentication on youtube that was designed for 1.8 to the letter. It fails to work in 1.9.x. Can't get it to work for the life of me. Completely frustrated with Zend Framework!
Zend Framework has shifted from being a relatively accessible and simple system to a more complex entity. It has gone through a number of rapid developments over the past couple of years which have left a lot of older documentation around.
We have projects that are stuck on Version 1.7.x because the differences between that and the latest version are too great which makes the dev and testing time too expensive.
I like Zend Framework because it has so much depth to it but it is definitely a two edged sword for beginners.
I'd certainly recommend making use of the expertise of other users and search out some simple framework examples. ZF is highly adaptable but you need to try and work from the simplest case possible for your needs.
I think Matthew Weier o'Phinney, (search for 'Phly, boy, phly') is one of the more approachable members of the dev team and has loads of examples and ideas on his website.
Good luck!
I realize that this may be subjective but I truly need an answer to this and I can't seem to find anything close enough to it in the rest of the Forum. I have read some folks say that the framework (any MVC framework) can obscure too many things while others say that it can promote good practices. I realize that frameworks are great for a certain level of programmer but what about individuals starting out? Should one just focus on the language or learn them together?
I think web development is way more than anyone grasps when they first start getting into it! Read this and know that it is all optional...but required to be really good at what you do.
I suggest that you spend time learning your language first. I would suggest learning C# simply because it is vastly more marketable and it is usually directly supported in most of MS products. By learning C# - programming in ASP.NET, console apps, servers, services, desktop apps, etc. will all be within your reach. You can program for most of the MS products as well as on many Linux type platforms.
Once you have this down then you can move to programming for the web as programming for the web has some intricacies that most other environments don't have. Concepts such as sessions, caching, state management, cross site scripting, styling, client side vs server side programming, browser support, how HTTP works, get vs post, how a form works, cookies, etc. are all at the top of the list of things to learn separately not to mention learning the ASP.NET base frameworks and namespaces.
Once you have the programming language down and then the concepts of web programming I suggest that you pause and learn database design. Don't worry about performance just yet...try to first learn good design. Performance will come next. A good start for you is Access (blasphemy I know). It is easy for a beginner to work with. And it translates into a more robust platform such as SQL Server easily. Learn at the very least some SQL...but I suggest that you learn as much as your stomach can handle. I heard someone say that SQL is like the assembly language of the database. The number one thing that slows an application to a halt is piss poor database design and poor queries. Once you have this knowledge - stuff it away in the back of your mind and take a look at a good ORM. NHybernate is probably best at the moment but is more complex that the basic learner needs. For that reason I currently suggest getting LINQ to SQL up and running as it is SUPER EASY to work with. Then look at Entity Framework (although I still think it sucks...and you should wait till EF 2.0...ERRRRR...now 4.0 released with .net 4.0). Then NHybernate.
Now is the time to start to understand the infrastructure that is required by web development. You may bump your head against this as you learn some of the web programming stuff. But you need to understand the basics of DNS, IIS, load balancers, sticky routing, round robin, clustering, fault tolerance, server hardware setup, web farms, cache farms (MemCached Win32, Velocity), SMTP, MSMQ, database mail queuing, etc. Many people may say you don't need this. That there will be some knowledgeable network admin to help you out here. However they generally know things that impact them...not you. The more you know here the more valuable you will be to the company that hires you.
Now you can get into the details of best practices and design patterns. Learn about the basics such as repository pattern, factory pattern, facade pattern, model view presenter pattern, model view controller pattern, observer pattern, and various other things. Follow Martin Fowler and others for suggestions here. Take a look at concepts such as inversion of control, dependency injection, SOLID principle, DRY, FIT, test driven design, and domain driven design, etc. Learn as much as you can here before moving to the next step.
NOW you can think about frameworks! Start by creating a basic application with ASP Classic (comes with IIS for free!). This will give you a flavor of a no frills web development environment. Take a look at ASP.NET web forms (briefly) to see how MS attempted to make things easier by hiding all the complex stuff (which you now know how to manage on your own from your readings of the above materials!!!). Now you no longer need ASP.NET Web Forms. Move immediately to ASP.NET MVC. The MVC framwork gives you all the power you need to create a good easily manageable web application. If you build something really big no framework for pure web development may be able to deal with what you need. However MVC is way more extensible for such UBER custom scenarios.
Now that you have made it through the journey to ASP.NET MVC you can take a look at things such as Microsofts Enterprise Application Blocks (such as they use at MySpace). Take a look at Elmah error logging (a must have). Look at how to build a custom SiteMapProvider for your MVC site. If you need to get into searching stuff understand Lucene.NET.
And if you made it this far...you are ready to figure out the rest on your own as it comes up! Have fun. There is a lot of room in this space for a person with some understanding of all of the above concepts.
You'll be using SOME sort of framework. The question is, what level do you want to learn at?
You'll probably not care to learn about asynchronous I/O and mutlithreaded vs. select/poll styles of web servers.
So then, your language of choice is going to provide a layer atop this, the languages preferred "web interface" API. For Java it's Servlets, the lowest level you'd typically code at for server side web applications.
You should find what this "lower level" layer is in your language and learn the API at least. You should know basic HTTP like status codes, cookies, redirects, POST vs GET, URL encoding, and possibly what some of the more important headers do.
You'll then come to appreciate what these higher level frameworks bring to the table, and be better able to evaluate what is the appropriate level of abstraction for your needs/project.
Web development requires a certain degree of organization, since it relies so much on separation of concerns. The browser, for example, is designed to display data and interact with the user. It is not designed to lookup data from a database, or perform analysis. Consequently, a web development framework can help provide services that are needed to make the browser experience a practical one.
The nice thing about employing a platform is that it will provide core components essential to the making of any web application that you won't (and shouldn't) have to think about, such as user membership, for example. Many of the design decisions and deep thinking about how to implement these services has already been done for you, freeing you to focus on what you actually want you application to do.
Of the available frameworks, I find that frameworks that implement the MVC (model-view-controller) pattern are very practical. They clearly organize different functions of web development, while giving you full control over the markup presented to the browser.
All that said, you will need some fundamental skills to fully realize web development, such as HTML, CSS, and a core programming language for the actual underlying program, whether you use a platform or not.
I don't think I agree with the Andrew. I don't think learning C is a pre requisite for web development. In fact, learning something like Javascript, Action-script or PHP is often easier due in large part to the vast numbers of sites and tutorials available, and are enough to expose you to the fundamentals of pretty much every programing language. Variable, Conditions, Loops and OOP. I just think learning C# introduces a lot of learning that isn't really relevant to web development such as pointers and memory management.
As for wether you should learn a framework first? Definitely not. Never ever. You need to be able to stand on your own two feet first and be comfortable with HTML/CSS, Server Side Scripting (PHP/ASP/Python/Ruby whatever) and love it or loathe it, but you're going to have to have a decent understanding of Flash and Action-script.
The order in which you learn these is entirely up to you. But my learning plan would go like this...
Start with HTML. It takes about half an hour to get the basics (it's made up of tags with attributes, end of lesson 1) and it's good to get it out of the way first.
Then start leaning CSS. You'll get the basics again, very quickly. But CSS is a minefield so expect to spend the rest of your life figuring it out.
Next up Action-script. Most people wouldn't agree with me, but bear with me. HTML and CSS aren't programming languages. Action-script is. And learning a programing language for the first time is difficult and tedious. The advantage Action-script has over most other languages is that the results are very visual. It's enjoyable to work with and you can sit back and take pride in your accomplishments at regular intervals. This isn't possible with server-side scripting languages or Javascript and there's a whole host of stuff you need to learn to get server side scripting up and running. You can't build space invaders in with PHP for example.
I've changed my thinking here. I would encourage beginners to ignore ActionScript and focus on Javascript. I still believe that being able to see stuff on screen quickly is a good motivator, but I would encourage people to look at canvas tag tutorials and frameworks. Javascript has come a long way since 2009, and is now the lingua franca of programming, so it's incredibly useful. My initial point about HTML and CSS not being programming languages still stands.
Then, you can start with your server side language. At the same time, you're going to have to figure out the database stuff. I recommend PHP and MySQL because it's free.
Again, I've changed my thinking here. I would encourage beginners to use Javascript on the backend (Node.js), and split their database learning between relational databases and noSql solutions such as Mongo.
Then.... learn your framework. Or better yet, roll your own. That's what I've been doing and it's supercharged my learning.
If you're getting into web development, You HAVE to know how those building blocks work. You don't have to be an expert in all the areas, but you should try to become an expert in at least one of them. If you start learning a framework before you get the fundamentals you'll be in a sticky middle ground where you don't understand why things don't work which will infuriate you, and anyone who has to work with you.
you should learn how to use framework because it would be helpfull for u in the future also it is easier to learn.
MVC will help you a lot .. trust me ... i was developing web project not using mvc and it is like mess ... (in the past there are no well know mvc and i never heard about it)
Short version: yes, and then some.
FWIW : This more generic answer may be of use to someone out there.
What: Frameworks take out tedium of using boiler-plate code again and again. They hide complexity and design issues under wizards and conventions. They also use special libraries, design patterns etc. in ways that are far from obvious to a beginner.
So using a framework is good for getting things done without knowing exactly how - like using an ATM without knowing the internals. You just add your code bits in certain places and things 'just work'.
HTML > CSS > Ruby > SQL > Rails/Javascript framework > Libraries would make for a good learning track. Rest you learn as you go along by being curious, hanging out on forums or as extended learning as need arises.
HOW: The problem starts the minute you step outside simple text-book examples (i.e. when you try to get it to do something even a bit different).
Decoding cryptic error messages when it seems like you've done everything right but things still don't work. Searching on error strings in forums may help out. Or just re-starting from scratch.
Reading up articles and books, videos, trial-and-error, hard-work, search-engines, stackoverflow/forums, local gurus, design articles, using libraries, source-code browsing are a good way to climb the learning curve gently and on a requirement basis.
Working-against-the-framework is the number one problem for beginners. Understanding what the framework expects is key to avoiding white-hair in this phase. Having enough insight to manually do what the framework automates may help reduce this second-guessing effort.
WHY: For more advanced debugging/design, it's good to know what the framework is doing under the hood esp. when things don't work as you planned. Initially you can take the help of local-gurus or forum gurus who've already done the hard work. Later as you go deeper you can take on more of that role. For example there's a "rebuilding rails" book which looks under the hood of Ruby on Rails.
Note: Some of the tips are oriented towards Ruby/Rails but you can easily substitute your favourite language/framework instead.