Just to comment - the goals might be similar, the implementation is fundamentally different. GWT builds fat-client apps that operate almost entirely on the client, in the browser. JSF and other similar tools build "fat-client" apps that operate almost entirely on the server, passing vast amounts of stuff back and forward to make this happen.
Really, the only thing they have in common is "make web development more like a gui" - and there's a long list of other tools that also have this goal. Gwt is the first one I've seen where it kind-of vaguely almost seems to work. I'm very sceptical about most of the others. :) - Korny On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Dave Bolton <davebol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've been doing a lot of JSF (Java Server Faces) work recently, which > is different to GWT in implementation, but similar in that it seeks to > abstract the pain points of web development away. In the case of JSF > a common refrain is to claim it makes web development more like > Swing/rich interface development. In broad terms, GWT's goal is > probably not all that different. > > Very generally main advantages: > - makes rich web apps easy (it helps to understand HTTP, but is by no > means necessary). > - allows you to use generic development resources (i.e. I don't need > to find developers who know a range of different technologies -- if > I've got a Java guy/gal, that'll do) > > Disadvantages: > - if a component/abstraction doesn't work as expected, debugging can > be a massive pain > - generated HTML is ugly and non-standards based. Hell, it's mostly > table based. > > > You can't use sass without > > already knowing css, but if you can write GWT without knowing javascript > > then you may be running the risk of digging a very deep hole. > > Yup, this has been the biggest observed issue for me (for JSF)... it's > not just knowing javascript that is an issue, but having the tools to > get beneath the abstraction. I'd assume it's the same for GWT's > compile-java-to-javascript process. > > Having said all that, there're are some nice things too. The event > model, with multiple action end-points, is great, and the rendering > life-cycle, converters and validators, all provide a good level of > flexibility (again, in JSF). > > Cheers, > Dave > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Lincoln Stoll<lst...@lstoll.net> wrote: > > I'm assuming it is - in dev mode (hosted in their > > > browser) it is supposedly debuggable as java byte code, which is interesting. > In prod, I'm not so sure. > > But yeah, I totally agree. It seems to integrate with third party JS, so > the > > generated stuff can't be *that* hard to understand. > > The main downside is that it is java project only. > > On 22/06/2009, at 1:33 AM, Myles Byrne wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Lincoln Stoll <lst...@lstoll.net> > wrote: > >> > >> I guess less time in dev, consistency in testing and language for > >> development, potentially more efficient output, integration with > existing > >> code? > >> I'm not using it at the moment, but in some ways it looks interesting. > > > > Seems reasonable. As long the js is debuggable. Having to learn js (and > more > > importantly, the GWT style of 'compiled' js) because the abstraction > leaked > > would be my main concern as a java developer. You can't use sass without > > already knowing css, but if you can write GWT without knowing javascript > > then you may be running the risk of digging a very deep hole. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of" --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to rails-oceania@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rails-oceania+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
