 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / October 2006why so many frameworks? Can you just put all best ideas in 1?
Why so many java frameworks? Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? Jeesh > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh :) Why all those different food recipes? If chocolate is good, and honeyed ham is good, why not just stick it all in a blender and get one really solid product? > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh Different tools are effective for different purposes, and the most effective tool depends on the problem you're trying to solve. Sometimes it's smarter to use a car, sometimes it's smarter to use a truck, sometimes it's smarter to use a bycicle, and sometimes it's smarter to walk. - Oliver >Why so many java frameworks? So many different needs, and different tradeoffs to make for different applications and environments. >Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? Sure, just like we've successfully done with cars, OSs, supermarkets, restaurants, computer manufacturers, banks, etc. -- Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/> >>Why so many java frameworks? > > So many different needs, and different tradeoffs to make for different > applications and environments. And, to be fair, so many different inventors of frameworks. While it's true that a multiplicity of frameworks is needed, that doesn't mean all the ones that exist are. We don't really need all of DOM, DOM4J, and JDOM. Mike Schilling wrote: >>> Why so many java frameworks? >> So many different needs, and different tradeoffs to make for different [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that a multiplicity of frameworks is needed, that doesn't mean all the ones > that exist are. We don't really need all of DOM, DOM4J, and JDOM. Yep. Besides the diversity of requirements there are also a good portion of NIH syndrome. Arne >>>Why so many java frameworks? >"Mark Rafn" <dagon@dagon.net> wrote in message >> So many different needs, and different tradeoffs to make for different >> applications and environments. Mike Schilling <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote: >And, to be fair, so many different inventors of frameworks. Absolutely. The creator, distribution mechanism, support system and expectation of updates are all part of the tradeoffs to consider when choosing one, or choosing whether to write one. >that exist are. We don't really need all of DOM, DOM4J, and JDOM. I take a more philosophical view. Nothing gets created that someone doesn't think they need. If any of these weren't needed, they wouldn't have been created and wouldn't be used. -- Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/> <snip> > I take a more philosophical view. Nothing gets created that someone doesn't > think they need. ^^^^ Note the word 'think'. > If any of these weren't needed, they wouldn't have been > created and wouldn't be used. Here you incorrectly extrapolate from perception of need to actual need. Many managers *think* they need a new technology when they actually don't. Regards, Bart. >> I take a more philosophical view. Nothing gets created that someone doesn't >> think they need. >> If any of these weren't needed, they wouldn't have been >> created and wouldn't be used. >Here you incorrectly extrapolate from perception of need to actual >need. Many managers *think* they need a new technology when they >actually don't. Heh. It's fun to bash dumb managers, but I'd love to hear your definition of "need" that includes writing any software at all and doesn't include the variation in technology found in different frameworks. -- Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/> > >> I take a more philosophical view. Nothing gets created that someone doesn't > >> think they need. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > "need" that includes writing any software at all and doesn't include the > variation in technology found in different frameworks. I didn't say that there are no true needs. I'm just disagreeing with your statement that everything that ever gets created is out of a true need, as opposed to hype. Regards, Bart. gavino ha escrito: > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh This is a political question. The answer is because of freedom. Forcing to "put all the good ideas into 1" is something that comiunism likes to, and it has been demonstrated that it is not a good thing (and it goes against freedom, too). Extending your question, why so much languages? why so much computer sellers? why so much companies at all? Let the state control all... ;-) Hm I would say that a car is a compilation of the best ideas thought of so far. airbag, anti lock break, cd changer system, high beams, automatic windows, defogger, ac, heat, etc Engineering is often about combining the best things in new complete combination rather than inventing new things. It just seems there are a perponderance of frameworks. I do like that anyone can do it, that is very free market, but your think there would be a selection of strongest genes over time etc. I hesitate to use java to do programming because of what I see as bloat. java is optimized for MBA empoyment needs for reusability of programmers rather than seeming to have the elegance of say scheme. It is used th emost for many reasons I assume. I just am trying to sort out many things I see about software production before I invest time in leanring these tools. Some even say that taking logic out of DB and placing in appserver and framework is bad and everything should exist in tables. comments? Cross polination doesn't seem to be as rampant as it could be. > Cross polination [sic] doesn't seem to be as rampant as it could be. How could you have cross-pollination unless you have a multiplicity of antecedents? Sounds like an argument in favor of a multitude of frameworks. How would you use a GUI framework to develop a Web service, or vice versa? Different frameworks for different purposes. "A marketplace of ideas." Competing frameworks ineluctably evince different strengths and weaknesses. Competition and cross-pollination should benefit the developer over the long haul. There are many kinds of car, not all with anti-lock brakes, and the Edsel is a memory. - Lew > Hm I would say that a car is a compilation of the best ideas thought of > so far. > airbag, anti lock break, cd changer system, high beams, automatic > windows, defogger, ac, heat, etc But there are different types cars, all with different design goals: luxury cars, sports cars, mini-vans, race cars, etc. There are cars that run on gasoline, others than run on electricity, and there are hybrids. Not everyone agrees on what is the one best *TYPE* of car, nevermind the one best car itself. - Oliver > But there are different types cars, all with different design goals: > luxury cars, sports cars, mini-vans, race cars, etc. There are cars that > run on gasoline, others than run on electricity, and there are hybrids. > Not everyone agrees on what is the one best *TYPE* of car, nevermind the > one best car itself. But note that there is also far more choice in that market than is justified by the variance in customers' requirements. If one manufacturer manages to make money from a range then just about every other manufacturer will attempt to cut themselves a piece of the same pie. Something similar happens in the frameworks world; and that -- together with the typical programmer's uncontrollable fear of simplicity -- makes for a more than confusing situation. Unfortunate, but probably inevitable... -- chris I totally agree with you, there are just too many.. I've recently started a web project and ended up with Hibernate, Spring, Shale-tiles and JSF though there are a bunch of others to read through before one can decide (Cayenne, Tapestry, Faclets and the list goes on) . . . I think that the java community have been too small and are too "new" for one big, or a few, specialised frameworks for the "main needs" have had time to emerge. The frameworks today try to strive in beeing general purpose within the different areas database(hibernate), middle tier(spring) and so on. But to actually put them up together takes quite some reading and time. Though I'm certain that there "soon" will come more "collections of the good parts". I.e. one solution for "making web pages", "making applets", "making games"... An example is Shale which seems to be a promising collection of different parts of bigger frameworks, specialised in making webpages, but the documentation is severly lacking as yet. Regards Tomas. > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh >Why so many java frameworks? >Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? >Jeesh I think the reason is that by the time a framework, or language, satisfies all the requirements it is so overladen with features that it is incomprehensible. The situation is made much worse because many of the features are only there for backward compatibility and there are several ways to achieve the same result. > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh Are you coming from the "single source, single solution" world of Micrsoft Windows development perchance? You need to unlearn that choice is bad. > Are you coming from the "single source, single solution" world of > Micrsoft Windows development perchance? You need to unlearn that > choice is bad. Choice /is/ bad. It may -- like democracy -- be the least bad of the available alternatives, but choice is not a good thing in itself. Which situation would you rather find yourself in when you need some facility, XYZ: A) pick the XYZ package off the shelf and use it. B) Investigate a dozen packages each of which claims to provide a good XYZ implementation (in some cases wrongly, in others correctly); select one and use it. Option (B) involves a good deal of wasted time. (B) is only preferable to (A) if there's a good chance that the choice you eventually make will be enough better than (A) to reclaim more than that time and effort. If the producers of the options in (B) operate like the open source world, then that's none too certain. (Though I will admit that if the producer of (A) is Microsoft then it's probably not going to be too hard to beat -- even by the o-s world). There are other downsides to option (B). E.g. fragmentation of the employment market, or fragmentation of the development effort. Also its upsides are not necessarily available in practise -- there is. the risk of management-imposed substandard solutions, and inertia ("we know we aren't using the best option, but it would cost too much to change now"). -- chris > B) Investigate a dozen packages each of which claims to provide a > good XYZ implementation (in some cases wrongly, in others > correctly); select one and use it. Well, people don't seem to mind doing that when it comes to buying a car, for instance... :) In fact, people make choices all the time, because in EVERY market there is choice unless there is a (bad) monopoly. Why should software be any different? Let's take CVS versus Subversion: Apperently, the makers of CVS didn't see a problem with the annoying fact that moving a class to a different package meant deleting it in one place and creating it anew in another, losing revision history in the process. Plus that binary files were stored whole for each version instead of just as a binary diff. Now, in "your" world, Subversion (which fixes both of those issues) would not exist because everyone would shrug and submit to the limitations of CVS. (In fact, why should CVS exist there? Since everyone uses Windows, everyone should just use Visual SourceSafe from "choice-is-bad"-favorite Microsoft.) Others include Ant vs. Maven, SAX vs. StAX, WebMacro vs. JSF... Choice exists because something is made that someone else is dissatisfied with. Or there is a different approach to a problem. Or the maintainers of project A are primadonnas refusing to accept feature requests and patches provided by others, leading to the formation of project B, if necessary as a fork from project A. Or a product costs money and a cheaper/free alternative forms. >> B) Investigate a dozen packages each of which claims to provide a >> good XYZ implementation (in some cases wrongly, in others [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > everyone uses Windows, everyone should just use Visual SourceSafe from > "choice-is-bad"-favorite Microsoft.) Actually, I think in a single-choice ideal world, it's CVS which wouldn't exist, rather than Subversion. Ideally, you'd have exactly 1 choice, and it is the most optimal choice of all possible choices that could have existed. So actually, you'd probably have something better than Subversion too. Some sort of source management software crafted by God, and handed down to us human, which is so great, no one would ever want to use anything else. Unfortunately, that's not how our world is, and we don't have software written by God. We have a bunch of imperfect software, some more imperfect than others. And now we have to spend time, money, and effort, researching which software is the least imperfect for us. And to make matters worse, the level of imperfectness varies from usage-scenario to usage-scenario, so it's not like someone could do the research one, determine which software is the best, and now we all know that for the rest of time to ignore all other software package. Nope. What's best for you might not be what's best for me. Which means if you spend 2 weeks researching the best XML parser for you, I'd have to spend another 2 weeks researching the best XML parser for me; I can't re-use your research. - Oliver > Actually, I think in a single-choice ideal world, it's CVS which > wouldn't exist, rather than Subversion. Ideally, you'd have exactly 1 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > handed down to us human, which is so great, no one would ever want to use > anything else. In a perfect world we wouldn't need version control, we'd get everything right first time. Dan.  SignatureDaniel Dyer http://www.dandyer.co.uk > gavino wrote: > > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh As long as there is not a single answer to a given question, there won't be a single framework for all problems. Cheers K > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? What if some of the good ideas are mutually contradictory? BugBear > What if some of the good ideas are mutually > contradictory? Then they'd probably get shoe-horned in together anyway... -- chris (Not that this is a problem only for single-solution approaches -- the diversity-based approach leads to just the same shoe-horning effect) Chris e, wrote: >>What if some of the good ideas are mutually >>contradictory? > > Then they'd probably get shoe-horned in together anyway... Do you know my boss?!?! BugBear (who has had the joyful experience of explaining in detail why 2 features are mutually imcompatible, and having the PHB continue to insist that both features are good, and therefore we must have both - more "tick boxes") The best one is the one that provides you a simple and manageable solution. The fact that there are so many to choose from is a good thing. Cheers! -Cameron McKenzie Author of What is WebSphere? For Free Java Certification Mock Exams: www.scja.com Free Java and J2EE Multimedia Tutorials: www.mcnz.com www.pulpjava.com www.technicalfacilitation.com > Why so many java frameworks? > Can't you just put all the good ideas into 1? > Jeesh Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.