Patrick Casey wrote:
I'm with you on this point and I'm wondering if part of that may be
due to the way Tapestry is perceived in the broader community. I consider
myself a pretty damn experienced servlet developer, and Tapestry definitely
wasn't easy to get ahold of.
I think that says it all. Personally I could never feel comfortable with
servlets (and I've never done much with them or webapps). Coming without
this baggage to Tapestry I found it very easy to pick up and I built an
entire website with it in two weeks.
For a real servlet newbie, Tapestry, I think, is really frustrating
because it's advertised as "simple" when, in fact, it really isn't. Tapestry
is *powerful*, but it's not simple. .NET is way simpler; hell, from a
learning perspective, raw servlets are simpler than tapestry because there
are no black boxes to worry about.
The very nature of a "black box" is that you don't worry about it! It's
the main reason Tapestry worked for me - I didn't have to think about
any of the underlying boring stuff and could concentrate on building the
site itself.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
