Pros : * Statefull * Steady features (simple Ajax built-in, validation, ...) * Can do simple stuff quickly without knowing the internals (good for java developpers without web experiences)
Cons : * Not stateless (i'm talking about the stable 1.2 here) * Too much alternatives to do quite the same things (markup inheritance vs borders; passing component's constructors models, full objects or even components; ListView vs DataView vs GridView ...) * TOO MUCH JAVA and too component oriented: in fact on some pages you need to create some components (panels, fragment, or inner classes) to write maintenable code whereas these components will never be reused elsewhere. In general you need some effort and focus to produce maintenable code on not so complex pages / components, this is my biggest con. Martijn Dashorst wrote: > > Pros: > * elegant solutions to problems using object oriented programming are > possible again > * unspoiled (by model2 framework) graduates can create complex UI's > almost instantly > * you actually need to engage your brain at times > * custom component creation is *really* easy: just use extends (tm) > > Cons: > * single threaded model for responding to client actions: a lot is > sync'd on the pagemap > * you actually need to engage your brain at times > * getting to know the internals can be quite challenging as it is a > complex beast > * too easy to create complex UI's that show the world and then some > * sometimes the limitations of HTML/the web leak into the wicket > world, making it tougher for new web developers as they are presented > with quite an abstraction (keeping state in forms across requests in > tabbed panels) > > Martijn > > On 11/15/07, mraible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> FWIW, I'd like to replace the pros and cons (my opinions) with some that >> are >> more accurate. As users of Wicket, I'd love to hear from you and get your >> opinions on the top 3 pros and cons of Wicket. >> >> Here's the ones I currently have: >> >> Pros: >> >> * Great for Java developers, not web developers >> * Tight binding between pages and views >> * Active community - support from the creators >> >> Cons: >> >> * HTML templates live next to Java code >> * Need to have a good grasp of OO >> * The Wicket Way - everything done in Java >> >> IMO, there's no need to debate whether these are valid or not. If they're >> not - please suggest new ones. James Ward of Flex had a nice and honest >> comment this morning pointing out Flex's cons: >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yvybnm >> >> Thanks, >> >> Matt >> >> >> Sean Sullivan-3 wrote: >> > >> > fyi >> > >> > >> http://raibledesigns.com/rd/entry/comparing_jvm_web_frameworks_presentation >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Matt-Raible%27s-ApacheCon-presentation-tf4815955.html#a13780071 >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > -- > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst > Apache Wicket 1.3.0-rc1 is released > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-rc1/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Matt-Raible%27s-ApacheCon-presentation-tf4815955.html#a13783821 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
