@myfaces.apache.org
Subject: RE: Spring, myfaces, hibernate
hi all, thanks for replying.
I can understand using hibernate will remove jdbc coding. But currently, I'm
using Myfaces, it already has all the linking between webpages in
xx-config.xml, web.xml, so is there any need for Spring? Or maybe i shou
riday, March 31, 2006 10:51 AM
To: users@myfaces.apache.org
Subject: RE: Spring, myfaces, hibernate
hi all, thanks for replying.
I can understand using hibernate will remove jdbc coding. But currently, I'm
using Myfaces, it already has all the linking between webpages in
xx-config.xml, web.
hi all, thanks for replying.
I can understand using hibernate will remove jdbc coding. But currently, I'm
using Myfaces, it already has all the linking between webpages in
xx-config.xml, web.xml, so is there any need for Spring? Or maybe i should
go n read up more on Spring :) but just want to ge
hi all, thanks for replying.
I can understand using hibernate will remove jdbc coding. But currently, I'm
using Myfaces, it already has all the linking between webpages in
xx-config.xml, web.xml, so is there any need for Spring? Or maybe i should
go n read up more on Spring :) but just want to ge
hi all, thanks for replying.
I can understand using hibernate will remove jdbc coding. But currently, I'm
using Myfaces, it already has all the linking between webpages in
xx-config.xml, web.xml, so is there any need for Spring? Or maybe i should
go n read up more on Spring :) but just want to ge
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:05
AMTo: MyFaces DiscussionSubject: Re: Spring, myfaces,
hibernate
In my experience, apps that start out with 1 page and 1 bean tend
to end up being much more complex. So even in that case I would recommend
adding Spring en Hibernate to t
AMTo: MyFaces DiscussionSubject: Re: Spring, myfaces,
hibernate
In my experience, apps that start out with 1 page and 1 bean tend
to end up being much more complex. So even in that case I would recommend
adding Spring en Hibernate to the mix, especially because of the KISS
In my experience, apps that start out with 1 page and 1 bean tend to
end up being much more complex. So even in that case I would recommend
adding Spring en Hibernate to the mix, especially because of the KISS
principal:
Removing messy JDBC code and introducing IoC on all levels simplifies a
pr
I agree with the previous poster but I would definitly take a look at
Spring's JDBCTemplate if I was you, which is very simple and makes
your jdbc code much easier to write. Say farewell to your messy
exception handling code :) Plus, if you want to switch to iBatis or
Hibernate later on, it will be
If your app really is 1 page and 1 bean (and likely to stay around
this size) then I would think adding multiple frameworks is overkill,
remember the KISS principal. Some plain java and jdbc is fine.
If you are thinking about persistance/data mapping frameworks to
replace writing JDBC, don't forg
there a good example : Put JSF to work By Derek Yang Shen ( Build a
real-world Web application with JavaServer Faces, the Spring Framework, and
Hibernate).
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Spring%2C-myfaces%2C-hibernate-t1367883.html#a3670669
Sent from the MyFaces - Users fo
Take a look to the appFuse sample application.On 3/30/06, 101questionjsf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Currently I'm using only myfaces to do my application. Is it advisable to use
Spring and Hibernate? Can I proceed without them?Currently, whenever connect to db to do something, I'm writing jdbcstate
12 matches
Mail list logo
