Ben,
 
Would it be helpful for you to explain what Struts offers and what J2EE
Fusebox offers? I imagine some people won't immediately understand how they
contrast and compare.

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin J. Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 12:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: MVCquestion)


 
And even with Struts there is still a great need for J2EE Fusebox. It pretty
much comes down to each one does certain things better.
 
Fusebox, and Struts, and CFCs, and ColdFusion are all just means to
alleviate the pains of developers. They are essentially "tools" we use to
get a job done. All of them provide a different piece to the puzzles we try
to solve as developers, and each do so in a different way. Each piece has
different side effects, or does certain things better while doing others
worse (or not at all). 
 
CFCs are not a replacement for anything(!), they are an alternative. If the
alternative is better then you use it as a substitute. They provide a
different way of doing things we've pretty much been able to do.
 

-----Original Message----- 
From: hal helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 5/22/2002 10:52 PM 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: MVCquestion)



I've heard a couple of people argue/worry that CFCs will render Fusebox
unnecessary, as you've done Ben. CFCs are a simple implementation of
some of the qualities of first-class objects, such as Java has. But
Java, even with its full fledged objects, still needs the Struts
framework. I think CFCs are going to be fantastic when used with
Fusebox, but I don't see a component replacing an architectural
framework.

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 5:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re:
MVCquestion)


> Don't you understand... that if you don't want to move the
> standard to MX then you are dedicating resources to develop an
> alternate way of doing what MX is ready to do... hmmm... maybe I
> am wrong... but it seems like that is the case.

<plug type="Shameless">

That was actually one of the main points of an article I wrote just the
other day. You may find my experiences interesting.

http://www.fulgen.com/content/developerscorner1.cfm

</plug>

Benjamin S. Rogers
http://www.c4.net/
v.508.240.0051
f.508.240.0057

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to