Matt RaibleMatt Raible is a writer with a passion for software. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

The Angular Mini-Book The Angular Mini-Book is a guide to getting started with Angular. You'll learn how to develop a bare-bones application, test it, and deploy it. Then you'll move on to adding Bootstrap, Angular Material, continuous integration, and authentication.

Spring Boot is a popular framework for building REST APIs. You'll learn how to integrate Angular with Spring Boot and use security best practices like HTTPS and a content security policy.

For book updates, follow @angular_book on Twitter.

The JHipster Mini-Book The JHipster Mini-Book is a guide to getting started with hip technologies today: Angular, Bootstrap, and Spring Boot. All of these frameworks are wrapped up in an easy-to-use project called JHipster.

This book shows you how to build an app with JHipster, and guides you through the plethora of tools, techniques and options you can use. Furthermore, it explains the UI and API building blocks so you understand the underpinnings of your great application.

For book updates, follow @jhipster-book on Twitter.

10+ YEARS


Over 10 years ago, I wrote my first blog post. Since then, I've authored books, had kids, traveled the world, found Trish and blogged about it all.
You searched this site for "jvm". 113 entries found.

You can also try this same search on Google.

Groovy, Rails needs Components, RIA Frameworks compared and faster WebTests

Here's some interesting snippets I found while reading blogs today:

  • Stop writing plain old Java code. Groovy obsoletes plain old Java. We ought to just say "Java 7 = Groovy" and move on. -- Stuart Halloway
  • So far my experience is that I love the Ruby language and don't want to go back to doing Java except when/if I need to to pay the bills. But Rails I'm not as sold on. Mind you I'm not here to bash on Rails, there are some great things there and other people have done a fine job of praising them. But there are some things I definitely miss from Tapestry, and the most significant one is components. -- MysteryCoder
  • If you're looking for maximum control over presentation and the best possible appearance for the finished product, I would say Flex is probably the way to go. If you're a Java developer using Java on the server side, or you just can't stand the thought of having your app run in the Flash player and would prefer JavaScript, GWT is probably going to work out very well for you. Open Laszlo is going to offer a great deal of platform versatility, but at the expense of some polish and features available in the other two frameworks. - Kevin Whinnery in Three RIA Platforms Compared: Adobe Flex, Google Web Toolkit, and OpenLaszlo
  • A new experimental feature of WebTest allows to specify the number of threads that should be used for the tests what can bring enormous speed improvements without modification of the tests. -- Marc Guillemot

To summarize: use Groovy over Java, Rails needs components, Flex is the best RIA framework and WebTest keeps getting better. These aren't my words, but I don't see much fault in them either.

Posted in Java at Feb 05 2008, 12:30:34 AM MST 6 Comments

Is there room for both Rails and Grails in a company?

For the last week, I've been knee deep learning more about Rails and Grails. The reason is because I think developers (and companies) are going to have a hard time deciding which framework is best for them. The real question is: do they both do the same thing or are their different applications for each? Is "Grails vs. JRuby on Rails" a "Struts 2 vs. Spring MVC vs. Stripes" argument - where they're all so similar it probably doesn't really matter which one you choose?

Of course, the Stripes folks will object, but I really don't think it's that much better than Spring MVC 2.5 or Struts 2.1. Sorry guys. ;-)

If it is a Spring MVC vs. Struts 2 type of argument, then it seems to make sense for a company to standardize on one -- don't you agree? Does it make sense to allow both frameworks in a company if they're so similar?

Google has had much success in restricting its allowed programming languages to C++, Java, Python, and JavaScript. Shouldn't other companies do something similar? It seems like a good idea to restrict allowed web frameworks to a few as well. For companies with successful Java infrastructures, it seems logic to allow one Java-based web framework and Rails or Grails for getting things done as fast as possible.

Here's the sticking point: Ask any Rails developers and they'll say Rails wins hands down. Ask any Grails developers and they'll say Grails is the easy choice because it builds on top of Java's strong open source projects. Blah, blah, blah - where's the objective voice that's identified the "sweet spot" for each?

The Relevance guys, particularly Stuart Halloway, has a post about How to pick a platform. The logic in this post seems to imply that both frameworks do solve the same problem - just in different ways. Stu seems to recommend Rails for most applications, because Ruby is a better language. He says Grails might win if you have "an established team of Spring ninjas".

I know Stu and believe he does know his stuff (in both Java and Ruby). So is this the definitive guide on which framework to choose? If you have a staff full of Java developers, they should start learning/using Rails rather than doing the easier transition to Groovy, which they pretty much already know?

I don't know what the answer is, but that's what everyone seems to be saying. The problems is, the authorities on this matter (Rails vs. Grails) are often "head honchos" in companies that have a vested interest in seeing their respective framework/platform succeed. Since the Relevance team employs some Grails developers, it seems they're less biased. But who knows.

Is Rails really head and shoulders better than Grails? I don't think so, but I've only been programming with both for a week.

Posted in Java at Jan 30 2008, 11:48:14 AM MST 11 Comments

The future is now -- Java development in 2008

In The future is now -- Java development in 2008, Andy Glover writes:

The year 2007 was full of exciting plot twists, punctuated by growing excitement about dynamic languages, the open source evolution of the JVM, and the rise of Google as a strategic contributor to the Java community. The question is, what does all that tell us about the year ahead?
...
And so, despite some rumors to the contrary, I would argue that Java isn't going anywhere but up in 2008. Rather than peer into a crystal ball and try to divine the future, let's reflect on the major events and trends of the past year. Taken together, they reveal all we need to know about what's ahead in 2008.

He concludes the article with:

An African proverb states that Tomorrow belongs to the people who prepare for it today. Thus, the future of Java (at least for the next year) has already been brewing for some time. The events of 2008 will largely be shaped by the JVM itself, as languages like JRuby and Groovy grow in popularity and eventually gain enterprise-wide adoption. The promise of using Java to develop consumer mobile applications also seems more accessible than it has for some time, given Google's foray with Android and Sun's with JavaFX Mobile. Most of us will also be concerned with leveraging the emerging multicore systems and looking to Java 7's java.util.concurrent packages for answers. Lastly, open source Java and the business model surrounding it will continue to grow.

I agree that learning about JRuby and Groovy is a good way to be prepared for the future. Reading Ola Bini's Practical JRuby on Rails Web 2.0 Projects and/or Stuart Halloway and Justin Gehtland's Rails for Java Developers seem like good ways to get started with JRuby. With Groovy, Groovy in Action has received a lot of good reviews. For Grails, it's a bit more difficult as it's evolved so quickly w/o any updated books. I like the look of Scott Davis's Groovy Recipes, but that won't be released until March.

One thing to note: just because you learn these languages and frameworks doesn't necessarily mean you'll find a new job doing them. In my experience, there's still way more Java jobs than there is Rails or Grails jobs. I sat on a Consulting Panel last night at Denver's Ruby on Rails user group (DeRailed) and this was confirmed (at least for Ruby) by the recruiters on the panel. There were three recruiters and combined they've only seen 2 Rails positions in the last 6 months.

So if you're looking for a new job, I doubt you're going to find one that allows you to leverage your new-found JRuby/Groovy skills out of the gate. However, I do believe you can leverage these tools in your existing jobs and hopefully make your development life more efficient.

Posted in Java at Jan 25 2008, 09:03:18 PM MST 5 Comments

All Java web frameworks should support hot deploy of a single class

In Anyone else using Groovy?, Tim Fennell (inventor of Stripes) raves at how much he likes Groovy now that it supports Java 5 features. He writes that Groovy might offer a solution to make development with Stripes faster:

The other thing I've been wondering about is that if there were enough demand for it we could try adding "improved" groovy support. E.g. throw your groovy actions under WEB-INF and we'll use groovy's built in stuff to do auto-reloading etc.

Gregg Bolinger responds with an excellent idea:

It would be really cool if Stripes could automatically discover and load changes to action beans (including new ones) without the entire app restarting, regardless of what the action bean is written in. But I realize that is a pretty tall order. :)

I agree that it might be a tall order, but I don't think it's impossible. In fact, I think all Java-based web frameworks should support hot deploy of a single class. We shouldn't have to buy JavaRebel to do this. It should be mandatory.

When an application reaches a certain size, the startup time can get pretty lengthy. This is lost development time. Furthermore, if any part of the development cycle takes longer than 15 seconds, there's a good chance developers will do something else (check their e-mail, move onto another task, etc.). Multi-tasking may be a good skill to have, but it's a horrible way to be productive.

Of the frameworks I'm familiar with, only Tapestry 5 and Seam support reloading single classes without restarting the whole application. Why can't the other frameworks "borrow" Tapestry 5's code? Maybe someone should just buy ZeroTurnaround and give away JavaRebel for free.

If I had one wish for 2008, it would be for all Java web frameworks to support this feature. Pretty Please?

Posted in Java at Jan 24 2008, 03:11:18 PM MST 21 Comments

Migrating a Rails app to Grails

There's an interesting trend I've seen happening at companies over the last year. More and more, they're experimenting with Rails and/or Grails for both prototyping and real applications. I think this is an excellent use for these frameworks as they both are very productive. The reasons for their productivity is simple: zero turnaround and less code.

For a Java-based company that's built their bread and butter applications on Java and been successful with it, both frameworks can be disruptive. Bread and butter applications tend to be large and somewhat difficult to maintain. In my experience, the biggest maintenance headache is not writing code or fixing bugs, it's the turnaround time required to make changes, run tests and build the application to test in your browser. Since Rails and Grails eliminate the turnaround, it's only natural for developers at companies with a lengthy build process to love their increased productivity.

Over the next couple weeks, I'm going to do some experimenting with porting a Rails application to Grails. Why? Because I think companies are going to have a difficult time choosing between these two frameworks for rapid prototyping and (possible) production deployments. While both frameworks are great for prototyping, the last thing most developers want to do is throw away the prototype and develop it with something else. They want to continue to enhance the prototype and eventually put it into production. With Rails and Grails (and many others), it's possible to build the real application in a matter of weeks, so why shouldn't it be put into production?

For most Java-based companies, putting a Rails application into production is unfamiliar territory. However, a Grails application is just a WAR, so they can continue to use all the Java infrastructure they know and love. So for companies with an established, tuned and successful JVM infrastructure, does it really make sense to use Rails over Grails? The only thing I can think of is language reasons - there's a lot of Ruby fanatics out there.

So again, the purpose of my experiment is simple: to see if a Grails app can do everything a Rails app can. As for language features and scalability, I'm not really concerned with that right now. I'm not looking to prove that either framework should be used for all web applications - just certain types.

Has anyone out there ported a Rails application to Grails? If so, are there any gotchas I should watch out for?

NOTE: I realize that Rails can be deployed on the JVM with JRuby. However, I think many companies have existing Java-based tools (logging, JMX, Spring backends, etc.) that more easily integrate with Grails than Rails. I could be wrong.

Posted in Java at Jan 22 2008, 09:37:49 AM MST 12 Comments

Java Web Framework Smackdown at TSSJS in Vegas

This year's TSSJS is starting to look like an excellent conference. I'm particularly excited to be moderating the following Expert Panel.

Java Web Framework Smackdown: Struts 2, Spring MVC, Grails, Seam/JSF and Wicket
The leading advocates of today's popular Web frameworks will duel under the Vegas Lights. Come and learn when to use your favorite framework and to see if it can live up to its hype.

We're talking about productivity, scalability and maintainability of Java-based Web applications. The emerging trend is that simplicity is better and productivity matters. Furthermore, if maintainability is the most costly part of any application -- how do these frameworks perform?

Attend if you're a Java Web developer, or if you simply like good entertainment. A working knowledge of the popular Java Web framework options will make this session more fun. If you haven't worked with any framework, come and learn who has the best spokesman.

The Venetian I plan on bringing the boxing bell from OSCON 2005 to make this session one of the best in the show. I'll be coming up with a list of questions for these experts in the next couple of months. In the meantime, if you have any suggestions, please let me know.

With a venue like The Venetian, why wouldn't you go? ;-)

Posted in Java at Jan 11 2008, 12:06:24 PM MST 19 Comments

REST and Seam Talks at Denver's JUG

After a long hiatus, I decided to attend the Denver JUG meeting this evening. Tonight there's a couple of interesting talks:

I'll do my best to live-blog these sessions, so hopefully you can read along and learn everything I do.

Give It a REST by Brian Sletten
This talk isn't an implementation talk, it's more of a motivational talk. Brian is trying to answer the question "Why do we care?". We care because we have a lot of WS-Dissatisfaction. "Conventional" Web Services are often:

  • too difficult for non-trivial tasks (real complexity)
  • too complex for trivial tasks (artificial complexity)

RPC-based Web Services are mythically interoperable and time/process coupled in painful ways. SOAP has largely become popular because of marketing dollars behind in. REST is more like the "hippy" way that has grass-roots support with no corporate sponsor.

What makes SOAP difficult? It's remote procedure calls and its tunneled using existing application protocols (HTTP). Furthermore, there are no nouns (mappings to business terms), only handlers. There are no semantics, only handlers. When you tie yourself to a contract/WSDL, you can have anything back that you want - so as long as its simple XML. This isn't entirely true because a lot of things can be shoved into XML (Word documents that are Base64 encoded).

The main problem with SOAP is it solves a problem that most people don't have. It solves an edge case, rather than the main problem.

Many people say "SOAP is secure and REST isn't".

Why do people believe this? It's because of the long list of SOAP-related security acronyms: XML Encryption, XML Signature, XKMS, SAML, XACML, WS-Security, WS-Trust, XrML. Even if you're using these in your system, there's no proof that your implementation is secure. REST is what we all use on the web with online shopping, etc. We don't seem to have a problem with the security we use everyday on the web, do we?

SAO is an architectural style promoting loose coupling among software participants. Sompanies have rigid definitions of what constitutes a SOA. Many believe that SOAP is an essential piece, but it's not. SOAP 1.2 and Doc Lit are improvements, but are they necessary? Interestingly, 85% of Amazon's users chose REST over SOAP when given the choice.

What is REST? The acronym stands for REpresentational State Transfer. It's an architectural style based on certain constraints designed to elicit properties of scalability and extensibility. It's an idealized notion of how the early web should work and helped drive the way it eventually did work. It's more than just URLs!

Resource-Oriented Computing focuses on information spaces, not code or objects. It focuses on logical connections and reduces complexity by separating actions from nouns. In the history of the web, we started with URLs that pointed to documents. Eventually, these documents became dynamic and were generated on-the-fly.

URLs are locations on the web that are horrible names because they change so much. URIs are good names that have no way of being resolved. Fundamentally, REST is a separation of the parts of the system: Nouns, Verbs and Representation. A Resource (in a REST architecture) can be a file, a service or a concept. It can also have different representations. Resources are named with Resource Identifiers. It's simply the means of naming a resource. It's a standard syntax that allows various schemes. Often known as URIs (or IRIs). It's orthogonal to satisfying the reference and it's one of the missing pieces of "normal" web services.

Examples of Representation include 1) a particular dereferencing of a Resource Identifier to a Resource at a particular time, 2) a byte-stream tagged with metadata or 3) it could change based on request or processing/display capabilities of the client (Firefox vs. WAP).

REST's verbs are design decisions to minimize the the complexity of implementing a system. GET retrieves a resource and always returns the exact same result. It doesn't change anything in the backend system. Because of this, it allows for easier layering of your system - particularly when you introduce caching for GETs. POST is used to create (or update) a Resource. It does not require a "known URI" and it supports the append operation. PUT creates (or updates) a Resource, but requires a "known URI" and also supports an overwrite operation. Lastly, there is DELETE, which removes a Resource. This is not supported in modern browsers. Just because browsers don't support them doesn't mean you can't implement them in your applications.

REST's concepts were developed by Roy Fielding in his thesis. He was trying to create a system that had the following architectural properties: performance, scalability, generality, simplicity and modifiability. REST allows us to create true client-server applications. To satisfy scalability requirements, REST is stateless. All parameters travel with the request and no session information is maintained on the server. This improves scalability through load-balancing and allows visibility of intermediary processors.

One of the first things that becomes a bottleneck in enterprise systems is the database. This works fine if you like paying Oracle. By using REST and HTTP concepts, it's easy to take advantage of a cache. This allows replication of an external data set where it's too large to copy locally. REST allows you to create Layered Systems that allow you to have managed dependencies between layers. Having a RESTful architecture allows you to swap out the backend without changing the front-end and vise-versa.

Now Brian is going to do some demos using NetKernel. He recommends using HTML documents to describe services. The beauty of developing a RESTful system is there's nothing preventing you from appending ?wsdl to your URLs to return SOAP.

Invoking functionality using web-friendly techniques is a very nice way to build web applications.

What is controversial in REST? When you are not dereferencing you should not look at the contents of the URI string to gain other information.. However, if you structure your URLs in your application in a hierarchical manner, people will be able to use URIs in this way.

What isn't controversial? No one believes you should rely on sessions or other state at the application level. They also believe using nouns, not verbs is an excellent idea.


Seam by Norman Richards
Seam isn't just a web framework, it's an integration technology for building applications for the web. It's a technology that takes your persistence and web technologies and unifies them so you have a simpler view of your system.

First of all, what is Seam?

  • It's a unified component and event model - you access all your components the same way
  • It has a declarative state with a rich context model
  • It provides deep integration with minimal glue code
  • It minimizes configuration, prefers annotations to XML
  • It allows a freedom of architectures and technologies
  • It also allows testing of components in context

With Seam, you have a number of technology choices to make. The first is which business component model you want to use (EJB 3 vs. POJO). You might choose EJB 3 if you want more clustering capabilities. For persistence, you can use Hibernate or any JPA implementation. Norman recommends using JPA if possible. You also have a choice of languages: Java or Groovy (and possibly Scala in the future). Seam gives you a choice of web frameworks. All the examples today will use JSF, but there's also support for GWT and 2.1 will have support for Wicket. Also, there's some non-committers developing support for Flex. Norman believes component-based web frameworks are the best way to develop web applications. While I hear this from a lot of folks component-based framework authors, it seems ironic that the "best" way to develop webapps is not the most popular way (PHP, Struts, Rails).

I think it's ironic that there's a REST (no state) and a Seam (it's all about state) talk in the same night. I'm tempted to ask why a stateful architecture is better than a REST one, but I'm not really that interested in the answer. I think your architecture should be determined by the needs of your application, rather than choosing the architecture and then implementing an application with it.

In addition to choices, Seam gives you a number of tools: CRUD generation, Eclipse and NetBeans support and full IDE support in JBoss Tools / JBoss Developer Studio.

Now Norman is doing a demo - starting by creating a new Seam Web Project in Eclipse. He mentions that he's skipped a number of steps: downloading and installing Seam, downloading and installing JBoss and configuring your Seam installation and database in Eclipse. He has two projects in Eclipse - apparently the New Project wizard creates two - one for the application and one for testing. It's strange that the tests don't go in the actual project. The directory structure has src/action and src/model for your Seam components. After doing some simple CRUD, Norman starts JBoss and looks at the master/detail screens it generates.

To make a Java class a Seam component, you usually only have to add a @Name annotation to the class. While trying to show us how the Authenticator/login works, Norman tried to open components.xml. Unfortunately, this crashed Eclipse and 30 seconds later - following a bevy of "file does not exist" errors, we're back in action. To inject dependencies in a Seam environment, you use the @In annotation. In the example class, here's what the code looks like:

try {
  currentUser = (Person) entityManager.createQuery("select p from Person p where" + 
       " p.email = #{identity.username} and p.password=#{identity.password}").getSingleResult();
} catch (NoSuchEntityException e) {
  currentUser = null;
}

This example appears to encourage title coupling with the data layer, rather than loose coupling (i.e. a DAO layer). I'm sure Seam doesn't prevent you from developing a more loosely coupled application.

Bug Alert: The <h:messages> tag looks like it always has an <li> - even when there's only one message. Struts 2 has the same issue with its <s:errors> tag. It's disappointing that so many Java framework developers don't have more attention to HTML details.

Probably the coolest part of Norman's demo is how Eclipse auto-synchronizes with JBoss so he never has to start/stop anything when he changes Facelets pages or Java classes. Of course, hot deploy should be possible with any web application if you're using Eclipse Web Tools effectively.

I do believe all-in-one starter frameworks like Seam, Rails, Grails and AppFuse are excellent. However, I also believe they're solving a problem that only 10% of companies have. Most companies don't have the ability to start applications from scratch - unless they're a startup. Most companies have an existing infrastructure in place for the backend and they simply need a better web framework to slap a pretty face on it. I don't know the best solution for this, but it seems like a logical choice to RESTify the backend (possibly with a web framework) and then use a modern web framework for the front-end. IMHO, the best web frameworks for a RESTified backend are Flex, GWT and Appcelerator. If nothing else, these appear to be the most hyped for 2008.

Many of the enhancements that Seam has added to the Java web programming model are being pushed back into the Web Beans JSR. With Seam, injection is bi-directional (input and output), is continuous during application invocation and dis-injected after action is done. The whole purpose of this is to let Seam handle the state of your application. By not worrying about storing/maintaining state, you as a developer can concentrate on business logic more and get your applications done faster.

At this point, Norman started talking about Seam's events and how you can use them. Unfortunately, my battery ran out and I drifted off to do some other stuff. I'm sure Seam's Event Model is pretty cool, I just missed it.

Posted in Java at Jan 09 2008, 08:59:45 PM MST 5 Comments

Comparing JVM Web Frameworks Presentation

Early this morning, I assembled a Comparing JVM Web Frameworks presentation in preparation for my talk tomorrow at ApacheCon. As mentioned on Monday, this presentation compares Flex, Grails, GWT, Seam, Struts 2 and Wicket. While I think this presentation would be fun to deliver, I don't believe it has as much meat as the original talk I was planning to give. My original talk compares JSF, Spring MVC, Stripes, Struts 2, Tapestry and Wicket. Since I've used all these frameworks, I'm able to compare them more on their technical features. Since I haven't used Flex, GWT or Seam, there was no way for me to 1) try them all before tomorrow and 2) do a thorough analysis of how well they each handle my desired features.

Since the abstract on ApacheCon's website mentions my original presentation, I don't want to yank out the carpet and present the second without asking. So my plan is to ask the audience which one they'd rather hear and continue from there. I've updated both presentations with the latest statistics and uploaded them for your review. For those of you who've used these frameworks, I'd be interested to hear how accurate you think my Pros and Cons section is. If you know of better pros or cons, please let me know and I'll adjust as needed.

While creating the 2nd presentation, I found a couple things that surprised me. The first is how popular Flex is - not only in job listings, but also in skilled developers and mailing list traffic. Below is a graph that shows how there aren't many jobs for most of the frameworks, but there's lots for Flex.

Dice.com Job Count - November 2007

The following graph illustrates while I chose to use Flex instead of OpenLaszlo as the Flash framework. OpenLaszlo has a much smaller community than Flex.

User Mailing List Traffic - November 2007

The second thing that was surprising is Seam doesn't have a logo! How does it ever expect to become a popular open source project without a logo?! It's amazing they've made it this far without having this essential feature. To motivate the creation of a Seam logo, I'm using the following butt-ugly logo in my presentation (found here). Hopefully something better comes along before I deliver my talk tomorrow. ;-)

Seam Logo

Update: Monday's post started an interesting thread on Stripes' mailing list. Also, I really like Spring MVC's new annotation support. It'd be nice to see it go a step further and use defaults (like ControllerClassNameHandlerMapping + subpackage support) and only require annotations to override the defaults. IMO, Stripes, Spring MVC and Struts 2 are all excellent choices if a request-based framework provides the best architecture for your application.

Update 2: Comparing Flex, Grails, GWT, Seam, Struts 2 and Wicket seems to gave gained a lot of interest (and support) in the blogosphere. Because of this, I'm considering submitting it as a JavaOne talk. If I were to do this, how would you like to see this presentation changed and improved?

Update 3: I received the following Seam logo via e-mail. Thanks Christian!

Seam Logo

Update 4: I've updated the Dice.com graph to include "Java" with every search term. To understand the comments on this entry, you might want to view the previous graph.

Update 5: This presentation was posted to the Wicket User mailing list. I followed up asking users to post the pros and cons of Wicket. Now there's a lengthy thread on Wicket's Pros and Cons. Good stuff.

Posted in Java at Nov 14 2007, 03:14:53 PM MST 39 Comments

Comparing Web Frameworks: Time for a Change?

I first came up with the idea to do a "Comparing Web Frameworks" talk in 2004. I submitted a talk to ApacheCon and it got accepted. From there, I outlined, created sample apps and practiced this talk before ApacheCon. Believe it or not, that was my first time speaking in front of a large audience.

Historical note: October 2004 was a pretty cool month - I discovered Rails and Roller had a 1.0 release candidate.

When I created the presentation, it was in large part due to all the WebWork and Tapestry folks harassing me on this very blog. I started using Struts in June 2001 (the same month 1.0 was released) and had used it successfully on many projects. Part of the reason this blog became so popular was I posted lots of tips and tricks that I learned about Struts (and its related project) while using it. After a while, the noise became too heavy to ignore it - especially after I'd tried Spring MVC. So in an effort to learn more about the the other frameworks, I submitted a talk and forced myself to learn them. It seems to have worked out pretty well.

With that being said, I think it's time for a change. The reason I originally wrote this was to educate developers on how the top Java web frameworks differed and encourage developers to try more than one. A while later, I realized there's different tools for different jobs and it's not a one-size-fits-all web framework world. It's not a component vs. request-based framework world either. There's lots of options now. When I've delivered this talk earlier this year, I've always felt like I've left quite a few frameworks out. The solution could be to add more and more frameworks. However, I don't think that's a good idea. The talk is already difficult to squeeze into 90 minutes and it's unlikely that adding more frameworks is going to help.

The change I'd like to do is to reduce the number of frameworks down to (what I consider) the top web frameworks for deploying to the JVM. What are those frameworks? IMHO, they are as follows, in no particular order:

  • GWT-Ext
  • Wicket
  • Grails
  • Flex/OpenLaszlo
  • Seam
  • Struts 2

The RIFE, Tapestry and ZK folks can start bitching now. Sorry - less frameworks make for a more interesting talk. Maybe I'll add you in the future and I can ask the audience which ones they want compared then we can choose four and go from there. Why don't I mention Spring MVC? Because I think Struts 2 is easier to learn and be productive with and I also like it's more open and active community. I've written applications with both and I like Struts 2 better. As for Flex vs. OpenLaszlo, I'm somewhat torn. It seems like learning Flex is going to be better for your career, but it's likely useless without the Flex Builder - which is not open source. However, at $250, it's likely worth its price. I know the Picnik folks used Flex for their UI - I wonder how much they used Flex Builder in the process?

What do you think? Are these the top web frameworks for JVM deployment today? The next time I give this talk is this Thursday at ApacheCon. I may try to re-write my talk and then give the audience a choice of old vs. new. The downside of doing the new talk is I won't have time to write apps with GWT, Flex or Seam. Anyone care to post their top three pros and cons for any of these frameworks?

Posted in Java at Nov 12 2007, 04:46:56 PM MST 50 Comments

Google Goods at the Colorado Software Summit

This morning, I woke up early and attended Dion Almaer's talk on Google Gears. Dion works at Google in the Developer API group and is a member of the Google Gears development team. This presentation is called How to take your Web Application offline with Google Gears.

Dion starts with a video that Google Developers made. It's a parody of Dick in a Box, but it's called API in a Box. This was by far my favorite part of the presentation and it all went downhill from there. ;-)

Gears is a browser plugin that adds a database and a JavaScript API that allows applications to "go offline" and use these resources to store data. It does not do anything to handle synchronization of data back to the online database.

Gears has three modules as part of its API: LocalServer, Database and Workerpool.

The Database is embedded using SQLite. Google contributed Full Text Search to it and the entire database is 250K. Below is an example of how you might use the API:

var db = google.gears.factory.create("beta.database", "1.0");
db.open("database-demo");
db.execute("create table if not exists ...");
...
var rs = db.execute("select * from Demo order by Timestamp desc");
while (rs.isValidRolw()) {
    var name = fs.field(|);
    ...
}

During the rest of the talk, I tuned in and out, but caught a number of interesting tidbits:

  • GearShift - DB Migrations for Gears.
  • Database Query Tool - one-page browser-based application that can be added to existing applications to add a query browser.
  • Gears in Motion - full database tool for creating databases, modifying tables, inline-editing, etc. After building your database, you can export the SQL for use in a Gears application.
  • Syncing is not a part of Gears because it's a very difficult problem to solve - especially when you have huge data.
  • The best way to implement synching is to start simple, like Zoho Writer. It's like Google Docs, but allows you to read your documents off-line. The next version they're planning on allowing offline editing.
  • You should plan on allowing your application to run - possibly by using cookies to store the data and create a "CookieBaseContent" implementation that gets chosen instead of "GearsBaseContent". In other words:
    content = hasGears() ? new GearsBaseContent() : new CookieBaseContent();
    
  • Debugging is a pain - you can simplify by using helper functions that allow you to clear the database.
  • Google's Read/Write JavaScript API looks like some really cool stuff. It solves the cross-domain problem and is (at its core) a clever bundling of browser hacks. It's not specific to Google's APIs and can be used in any Ajax application.
  • Gearsmonkey - uses Google Gears with the Firefox Greasemonkey plug-in to take other's applications offline.
  • Dion uses Greasemonkey to add keystrokes to GMail and remove ads from Facebook.
  • Wikipedia has an offline version that's powered by Gears. It uses iframes to cache pages with Gears and was developed by Google. It's unannounced by Dion didn't say I couldn't blog about it. ;-)
  • Dojo offline has a sync framework.
  • Vortex is an offline toolkit that builds on Gears.
  • GWT has Gears support - all you have to do is drop a JAR in your classpath. If you don't like using Gear's JDBC-esque API - maybe you can use Hibernate with Gears?

Dion ended by talking about how Adobe Air is great for desktop-like applications that you can easily build with Ajax technologies. Silverlight is impressive, but only for media applications - you have to draw components yourself. Java Applets may make a comeback. The browser plugin has been rewritten to be fast as well as have full support for Java Web Start. It's possible that Gears + the Java Plugin can make it possible to use Java technologies (i.e. Hibernate or JPA) to talk to the browser's database. Firefox and WebKit are adding database components to their next major releases - so offline applications should become even easier to develop in the future.

Overall, this was a great talk - largely because Dion is a great speaker and made it fun and interesting.

After Dion's talk, I delivered my Web Framework talk and had some lunch while trying to get Rockies tickets (no luck). After lunch, I attended Bill Dudney's Comparing Spring & Guice talk. I learned some things about Guice I didn't know and enjoyed his comparison of the two Dependency Injection frameworks.

One question that Bill couldn't answer is how Spring 2.5's annotation support stacks up against Guice. Is it as full-featured as Guice? Does it add additional features and keep up with Guice for performance? What about wiring up objects without annotations - does it allow you to autowire your classes based on naming patterns without annotations in your code? What I'm hoping for is a DI framework that allows me to autowire classes using rules/conventions rather than annotations. I'm fine with using annotations for edge-cases, but it seems like a lot of the DI I do these days could be configured up-front and used for the entire application (rather than having to wire up each class).

Overall, it was a great day at the Colorado Software Summit.

View from our condo at CSS

Posted in Java at Oct 23 2007, 05:46:56 PM MDT 4 Comments