How Do You Decide Which Framework to Use? 291
GPolancic asks: "Software frameworks are increasingly popular software reuse technique, because they provide infrastructure functionalities to an application, or a layer of an application and therefore
reduce the work of a software developer. Numerous complementary (for example: Struts and Hibernate)
and competitive (for example: JSF vs. Struts or JSF vs. ASP.Net) software frameworks are available as both proprietary and open source software. A major precondition for the success of a software framework is their acceptance, which is related to market share or community size. On the other side, application developers need to review and select the best available software framework for their needs. Which factors do you evaluate before you decide to use a specific software framework?"
"Our presumption is that software developers mostly evaluate following software framework characteristics based on:
- perceived ease of use (e.g. easy to learn, easy to adapt)
- perceived usability (e.g. improving developer performances, reducing work, faster development),
- perceived sustainability (e.g. perceived long term support, supporting standards, clear project directions) and
- perceived fit to specific developer requirements (e.g. suited language, suited functions, suited architecture).
Easy to decide... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Easy to decide... (Score:3, Interesting)
How Dilbert [dilbert.com] life was back then in the late 90's. Sure it was a long time ago, but I bet it's "good practice" someplace...
Re:Easy to decide... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Easy to decide... (Score:3, Insightful)
Just tell your devs to use "the standard of the industry" == what everyone uses (struts) even if it's a fucking piece of crap (struts) and if dozens of projects have failed because of this heap of dung (struts).
Because that way, you protect your ass: if the project fail, can't be your framework choice, you chose "the standard of the industry", it's obviously because of the devs... or the marketting... or the hardware... but not you.
Re:Easy to decide... (Score:2)
Sure, there are a lot of bosses who know nothing but the business side of things, but believe it or not they're not *all* like that.
missing (Score:2)
but then again i could just be karma whoring. so whatever!
Re:missing (Score:3, Funny)
I think you've spent too much time on slashdot.
Re:missing (Score:2)
Hibernate and Struts are both very well known packages for the Java world. My company has plenty of apps that use both of them.
As far as ruby on rails... who in the business world uses that? Can you name any website or application currently in production that does. I have a guy who messed around with a website using it, but it is far from perfect and far from production.
Re:missing (Score:3, Informative)
"Can you name any website or application currently in production that does."
The Rails Wiki [rubyonrails.org] has a list.
You might have a long wait (Score:2)
Due to the economics of programming languages [dedasys.com], once something (Cobol, C++, Java) gets entrenched, it's just not going to disappear overnight.
Something like Ruby on Rails will see its market share grow primarily for new projects, where, if it is successful, it will comprise a larger and larger
Re:You might have a long wait (Score:2)
of course you're not going to see banks running on it right now... duh:-)
You might be suprised. I work at a tier one investment bank and they are surprisingly flexible in their approach to new technologies if it will save them money. For small projects such as informational microsites, we have a certain amount of freedom, especially for prototypes. This is why we are currently using Cocoon from jakarta for one project (Verdict - awesomely flexible but a little slow) which is certainly not a standard plat
Re:You might have a long wait (Score:2)
I think that 'convention over configuration' is more about "good defaults" rather than "not possible to do it any other way", although I don't know Rails well enough to be sure at this point. The idea being that you *can* configure stuff if you need to, but that most of the time you shouldn't have to - you only do it when it's necessary for the 'fine tuning'.
That's my philosophy, at least.
Rails - who uses it? (Score:2)
Mostly people who you won't notice until they pass you like you're standing still:-)
Belly Button (Score:2)
Re:Belly Button (Score:2)
Re:missing (Score:2)
The point was that no serious company is going to give Ruby on Rails a chance right now because it hasn't been proven yet. When I say serious compay, I mean a company that has SLAs.
Re:missing (Score:2)
And no prototype is not a framework which is widely used among corporations and big sites and never will be, it is a javascript framework and not even a very good one (dojo for instance is way better in the way it tries to be non intrusive and tries to cover more ground)
and the frameworks mentioned are very
Re:missing (Score:2)
Among managers you mean? Cause struts for sure ain't popular with any dev that has ever used any other framework. Spring, Webworks, Tapestry, probably, but Struts? hell no, the only ones who like struts are the guys who only ever used it, and never any other framework.
Widely used in corporations doesn't mean that it's good, widely used in corporations means that managers can easily cover their asses by picking it.
Lovecraft metaphor (Score:3, Funny)
Struts and Hibernate get consumed by an error trace of Cthulhuian proportions, if the supply of live sacrifices runs out, which it eventually shall, doomed one.
Go for the hype. (Score:5, Funny)
Let me tell you about this better web technology (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Let me tell you about this better web technolog (Score:2)
Re:Let me tell you about this better web technolog (Score:2)
On the other hand, rubies are a girl's second best friend.
Re:Let me tell you about this better web technolog (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Go for the hype. (Score:2)
You know, I was wondering (Score:4, Funny)
bloop bloop
Your not up to date with the hype. (Score:2)
Rails is soooo last season. Get a life!
django [djangoproject.com] is what's on.
Difficult to answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:5, Informative)
You design the application *then* you start making technical decisions about implementation - not the other way around.. there's already too much crap produced by people who *must* use the latest wizzy 'framework' and then design an app to use it regardless of the functional requirements.
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:2)
You can pretty much ignore this, as I am kinda just doing a self ping for a later read
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:2)
- DRY: I hate re-inventing the wheel everytime I pick up a new project. Not repeating yourself in intra- application code and inter-application code is a must.
- Rapid Application Development: if the framework is saving me time and speeding up the iterative development process, its a go. If I'm stuck trying to stay with in a structure or conform to someone else's st
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:2)
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:4, Insightful)
You're all missing the point. The question isn't "Which Framework Should We Use?", the question is "How Do You Decide Which Framework to Use?"
The answer the first question is, quite obviously, "Whatever is needed." But the second question is asking, in essence, "What factors do you use in determining 'whatever is needed'?" That seems like an interesting question, and I'm surprised people don't seem interested in discussing it.
Dlugar
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:2)
No it isn't. He asked "How do you decide which framework to use?", not "What framework...". That is a completely different type of question, and a very pertinent one.
The same answer to his question could lead to the choice of various frameworks for various projects, depending on the circumstances.
If you think it is silly to ask about how to go about making a rational decision, you presumably think rational decisions are silly. (
Re:Difficult to answer (Score:2)
Last time I was in this situation, back in 1997, I rolled my own [weft.co.uk]. It's served me very well for nine years, but increasingly design commitments I made early have started to seem wrong in terms of subsequent developments. Now I'm thinking of where I go from here; I've been thinking about the features a modern software system [jasmine.org.uk] should have. And I've got a proof of concept which generates all the elements of a Web application from a single source file [jasmine.org.uk].
I haven't yet decided which way I'm going to jump. But I hav
Framework schmamework (Score:5, Insightful)
It was a little more work up front, but I've gotten nothing but extremely positive responses about the interface. The application binary usually is under 50k, even the larger ones don't break the 100k barrier. They're extremely quick and responsive on modern machines, and still very usable on older ones. I like to do processing asynchronously (i.e. user types a few characters and a DB query kicks off in the background when they stop typing) and it keeps things snappy. It's pretty easy to literally run circles around all the bloated apps eating up tens of megs of memory or more.
Oh yeah, ol' school baby! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Oh yeah, ol' school baby! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2, Insightful)
OH NOES! It'll never handle it!
Are your win32 calls supported by WinXP and Win2000?(probably) How much effort would it take to port it to linux? Are you helping lock your organisation onto a single software platform?
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2)
This does assume competentcy on the part of the developer, but pretty much all programming does that. C can just bite a bit harder when this is lacking.
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2)
That sounds like a good academic approach. It's a good professional approach too if there's a reasonable expectation that the application will be ported to another OS.
On the other hand, most applications will never be ported from the environment they started on and the extra effort and added complexity of adding a layer of abstraction that doesn't model the problem being
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2)
No, it's because most applications are closed/proprietary and no one is willing to pay money to port the code. If there's no business case driving the port, there's no project; and if there's no project, there's no programmer to do cool things.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with DRM.
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2)
It more like no-one sees the need..
A Vision About This (Score:2, Interesting)
As I've begun writing applications for a living I've gradually been looking for a easy easy easy method of application development. Something that is truly RAD. For desktop applications I've se
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2)
Perhaps this seems like a crazy situation to you, and that it'd never happen, but at my last job, they hired on a head architect and he and another developer convinced management to move
Re:Framework schmamework (Score:2)
It all depends (Score:2, Insightful)
As much as its easy to suggest "use-this-or-that-framework-because-its-the-best", a quick inventory of what you have and where you're willing to go in the long run brings everything back to earth. Sorry if I didn't answer your question directly, but there are a lo
Do what the rest of us do (Score:3, Insightful)
Why I Hate Frameworks - a popular article (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why I Hate Frameworks - a popular article (Score:4, Interesting)
It is claimed in that article that the distinction between a framework and a library is a subtle one. Not so, not so. Programming languages are themselves frameworks, whereas an add-on framework is often a poorly implemented, misunderstood, misappropriated, half-assed, dumbed down, broken programming language. It is an attempt to add task-based end-use assumptions to a language, to turn an existing language into a special purpose tool. That could be bad, unless the framework was designed by someone who understands programming language design, or if it is done in a language designed with such extensions in mind - CLOS for instance.
So either forget frameworks, or choose them as you would a programming language, and accept that you have to learn and play by their rules, philosophy, paradigm, what-have-you. Just as you wouldn't want to write C style code in CLOS, you would rather learn and use the CLOS special facilities. CLOS *is* a framework, as is C, as is any programming language. This is why Objective-C is the greatest language EVAR, it took two completely at-odds programming philosophies and bashed their heads together. C, fark your static type system and compile-time checking! Smalltalk, let me introduce my old friends malloc() and SIGSEGV!
Libraries are better than Frameworks (Score:2, Interesting)
As a Java programmer for many years I can relate to the above article, there is simply too many frameworks, config files and overhead required in proportion to the size of most projects.
In the end your choice should be about *overall productivity* which is different to every
Do you really need a framework? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, reuse is good. But too much functionality in one package is not necessarily good. Sometimes it is better to rely on multiple small reuse libraries than on one "all singing, all dancing" framework.
For instance, if you have a large number of teams, do they all have the same needs? If the teams have divergent needs, picking "the best compromise" in a framework can have negative implications on their productivity.
Also, is the quality of the framework consistent across the whole system? For instance, if you have network class libraries and gui class libraries, are they both equally good? Or are you sacrificing on one side to get the benefit of another?
What are your maintenance/upgrade needs? While it's relatively easy to keep 5 versions of a network library around for legacy applications that don't need to upgrade, it's a very different story to keep 5 different versions of
Do you need all of the functionality the framework is bringing you? It might be nice for you to have choice, but how does the size of the framework affect the end user? If your app is small (say 1 meg) compared to a large framework (say 25 megs), it might not be so good.
What's your backup plan? What if the vendor of your framework abandons it? Or refuses to fix critical bugs? Will you be able to find something else that you can use in its place? Smaller pieces can be replaced easier than bigger ones.
I know this isn't the point of the question. But before you decide what framework you want, I urge you to consider whether you *really* need one at all. There are lots of reuse libraries around for every kind of application. It seems likely to me that picking and choosing *exactly* what you want for each circumstance is going to give you better results.
Re:Do you really need a framework? (Score:2)
What I don't understand about this question is: why would you have a framework that covers both network operations and the GUI? Aren't those seperate concerns? Wouldn't you use a specialized framework for each of those operations? Example: In java, I'd use a network
Re:Do you really need a framework? (Score:2)
My criteria (Score:5, Interesting)
2) Philosophy - I need to agree with the way they do things. Major reason why I ignored EJBs, but jumped on Spring
3) Cost - I hate having to spend unnecessary $$ when team members cycle, or we have to do an install. Free is best
4) Standards Based - Vendorlock is teh suck. I like the options of being able to swap a component if I'm unhappy with it, even if I know I'll never swap it.
5) Familiarity/Ease of Use - Will it ease into what we're doing? Can the team become proficient in it in a reasonable amount of time? Is there decent documentation available?
6) Licensing - I don't like unecessary limitations, or surprising my customers, so I avoid things like the GPL.
Let the market steer your decisions. (Score:2, Insightful)
If you are working on a product you have more flexibility to choose your own frame work, but if you are consulting or responding to RFPs then you have to choose a framework that the client is familiar with and comfortable with.
If you are going to be doing work for government or larger companies they probably already have a lot of time and money invested in a framework, so if you plan on doing work for them you better be able
Re:My criteria (Score:2, Interesting)
2) Open source, freely linkable and redistributable in any form.
3) Free.
4) Can be compiled to use stdc++, or use its own internal classes. Uses native controls etc where possible. Cross platform.
5) Very easy. Well documented.
6) Very flexible license, few limitations.
And what is this wonderful framework? wxWidgets.
Compiles on Windows, *NIX, Mac, Palm (!), PocketPC (!).
Has bindings in Perl, Lua, JavaScript and half a dozen o
Software maturity. (Score:2)
What you really need to look for is a mature product. Market share helps, but I keep waiting for that announcement that Ruby on Rails has some horrendous security hole because it's a 1.0 release. What you need is something that has been expanded upon, revised, and rethought a few times after having been deploy
My Views (Score:2, Informative)
In the business world this is huge, because time is money. That is the reason that Developers use these tools instead of developing new code from scratch.
perceived usability (e.g. improving developer performances, reducing work, faster development),
This might be hard to measure unless someone has used it in the past. Reviews of Toolkits are also hard to find and many places are gonna be bias.
perceived sustainability (e.g. perceived long term
Which one to pick... (Score:2)
Hibernate and Spring are two good examples of good projects with lots of mindshare.
Struts, however, I don't like. I don't like JSP or JBoss either.
Those are examples of the wrong solution to the problem; the complexity of the solution being too high.
Echo2 looks very promising, and I expect I'll be doing future development on it.
Been Thinking About This Too (Score:2)
Use what everybody else is using (Score:3, Funny)
Here is how my boss did (Score:5, Funny)
Imagine the look on our face... One of the colleagues later told us he almost peed in his pants for that experience.
Seriously though, this story is just a bit exagerated, but not that much, the selection process was almost like what I just described
Here is how programmers did (Score:2, Interesting)
Until a lone coder, sick at the lack of progress on this front, turned up with version 0.1 in the language of his choice.
I hope we're not going to regret this
Use a more powerful language (Score:2)
If you use CAML/ML, there are also typically libraries of combinators (e.g. CML) that allow you to get done what you need to get done.
People make frameworks for less powerful languages, because that's the only way you can get stuff done when your language requires so much effort to get things done.
Tried and proven methodology! (Score:2)
Then you get the one featured the most prominently in ads!
You do have Adblock disabled, right?
Good question. (Score:3, Funny)
That's just me, though. YMMV.
Maintainability, readability & coding style. (Score:2)
Whenever I use a third-party framework (for web development, both server-side and client-side), I spend half my bug-fixing time looking through the framework's code. It's frigging annoying! I don't know if my code's just that advanced, or if I have that much bad luck picking frameworks, but I always seem to be hitting the limitations of any frameworks I use.
Nowadays, the first thing I do upon downloading a framework is to open a couple of its files and look at the coding style, see if I can figure out what
Frameworks? (Score:4, Funny)
*shrug* I use Lisp. Most frameworks take about 4 or 5 macros to emulate. Not really worth the time to download any of them.
Those who don't use Lisp are doomed to reimplement it...
Seriously though (Score:2)
Re:Seriously though (Score:2)
Good point; unfortunately at this point the Lisp community has almost a half-century of legacy code committed to some form of Lisp or another, so standardization will not be coming any time soon. However, read-time conditionals and other read-macros go a long way towards solving this.
UFFI is pretty darn good. It just talks a little better than it listens.
Re:Seriously though (Score:2)
Seriously, and very probably.
I have written a small benchmark program which does random things strings of random size.
I implemented this in C and in LISP.
The LISP code compiled by SBCL has the same speed as the C program, and compiled by CMUCL it is even a little bit faster.
Obligatory reference (Score:2, Funny)
The one does it my way.. (Score:2)
I pick the one that does things my way.
I tend to use lots of factories, singletons, stateless objects, data access components, transactions, and data validators.
I can either write and implement a lot of these myself, or I can pick a framework that does it as much of it as possible for me.
An interesting story, I was messing with an application awhile back. Something completely different, and i was using this framework because of its connection management. I then discovered that it everything interesting I
Documentation! (Score:4, Interesting)
Next I take a look at the amount of functionality offered, compared to the pain of learning the framework, and the risk of tying my code to someone else's code that may break or not work on some platforms. Another important thing to consider is how easy it would be to write your own equivalents of the bits of framework you need. If the benefit to pain/risk ratio is too low, I eliminate it from consideration. (That's always been enough to keep me away from Struts--it doesn't seem to do anything that's hard to do anyway, so it's not worth the pain and risk.)
After that, it might be time to look at specifics like how clean the API is, how mature it is, and so on.
Loaded question but a few a musings. (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Know what goals you have to meet. The eventual success or failure of a software project has more to do with having a strong vision of what it is you need to accomplish at the beginning regardless of platform or tool choices made before and during its development.
2. Be wary of selecting anything because it's cool. Many engineers, I think, fall into the trap of buying into cool toys rather than selecting mission critical tools.
3. Pick frameworks with a maturity directly proportional to the criticalness of the application you need to develop. If you are building something that is to be the the cornerstone of a company, you should pick well established frameworks that have a proven history and proven credibility to provide effective features. Conversely, feel free to experiment with less proven frameworks for applications that can afford to be less robust. A balance between sticking with tradition and building for the future does have to be taken into consideration.
4. Identify the top 3 features your application has to deliver and ensure your chosen framework excels at those features. Bells and whistles and future expansion are nice but make sure you take care of what's critical first before comparing extra features. This will help focus your evaluation and not get side-tracked by all the cool stuff a given framework might provide.
5. Experiment with possible options. There is no reason to select a framework based on paper analysis. Try as much to get your own hands-on experience.
6. If possible, interview other people who have used the framework in real applications. Get the opinions of people who have actually used your options in the real world. Don't let tech demos be your only guide.
Simplicity is key (Score:2)
There's a lot of over-engineered crap out there. eg. EJBs were in fashion but they were always over-engineered. Spring's in fashion now but when the honeymoon's over people will realise that Spring is just wrapper technology for existing frameworks and that it's hyped up junk too. Another example: Try and do anything complex with Hibernate and HQL. In the case of DB, SQL works so well. Plain JDBC and SQL with a little bi
Re:Simplicity is key (Score:5, Informative)
When selecting aggregates, JDBC works well. But Hibernate is pretty amazing if you are aware of its limitations. 90% of my code uses hibernate, 10% uses jdbc.
And the code that uses hibernate is pretty neat, it cuts down dev time significantly. I use hibernate tools in eclipse, point it to the DB and it generates all the classes, parsing foreign keys, making the associations.
Don't get me wrong, I like to be unique and cynical, against the grain if you will, but hibernate, despite the jerk off creator of it, is amazing and useful.
Re:Simplicity is key (Score:2)
Have you ever done it? It's awkward and you end up hand mapping from a result set. There may or may not be a better way but frankly I find the Hibernate documentation abysmal, the versions of Hibernate aren't backward compatible, and to top it off the mediators on the Hibernate forums tend to tell you to read the documentation if you raise a legimate concern (if they're being polite that day).
When selecting aggre
I'm starting to sour on frameworks (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm really starting to sour on frameworks. Libraries, love 'em to pieces. You want to take care of all the bit-bashing in the video card and present me an OpenGL interface, thank you very much. You want to give me a proper 21-st century file abstract like the KDE io-slaves, you have my gratitude. But you start bundling together five or six different technologies, each themselves fairly simple, and give me this unified framework or something, and in short order I'm likely to be cranky. This is especially true for things that are themselves fairly easy, like emitting HTML.
The problem is two-fold:
Especially in this age of using more dynamic languages, I'm finding I'm a lot happier taking smaller libraries and tying them together with my own frameworks, which I understand and can make sing and dance in exactly the ways I need them to with only the minimal complexity.
One important point here is the scale of development. If I'm going to do a three-week project, I'm going to probably go ahead and use a framework. But the larger the project, the larger the team, the more time that geometric price has to come up and bite you in the ass, where you Absolutely, Positively Need this thing the framework can't do, and it has to be done by tomorrow.
Also depends on your skill level, of course. And one of the cardinal Laws of Programming is that there are no Laws of Programming, only tradeoffs. I don't expect everyone to agree, I'm not pitching this so much as throwing it out as food for thought. Caveat, caveat, caveat.
I don't do Java, but my guess is that Hibernate, to the extent that it is a framework, is probably a win because it's so mature. But then again, you can also look at it as a really big library, because it sure does seem to play well with a lot of things. I think one of the distinguishing charateristics of a "framework" as I mean it in this post is that it is well-nigh impossible to glue two "frameworks" together, and sometimes even adding the capabilities of an additional library is an exercise in frustration. But the upshot is, I'm finding in practice that I'm a lot happier and more effective in the medium and long term, even on my own projects, with libraries that I tie together myself and not "frameworks".
While I'm not dogmatic about any particular one of them, the Agile-style development really help with this, and I might not feel this way without their influence. Automated Test (unit tests, usu
Ah, my pet peeve :) (Score:3, Insightful)
Singletons in the J2EE framework. Compare this monstrosity [theserverside.com] with a sigleton implementation in any sane language, including the simple, non-J2EE Java. Mind you, I'm not bashing J2EE here , the singleton issue is the price you
Re:Ah, my pet peeve :) (Score:2)
Perhaps because platform independence is one of the goals of Java, and so they can't assume that everyone is running Windows?
Re:I'm starting to sour on frameworks (Score:2)
Some things are worth trading off (its not a bug, its a feature)...
When we reach the level of automation that anyone can simply tell the system what they need in a progam, and it spits it out well optimized, then all of these programming methodologies will go the way of the roman numeral system way of doing math.
Is it going to take all these methodologies to get
Re:I'm starting to sour on frameworks (Score:2)
Re:I'm starting to sour on frameworks (Score:2)
It took 300 years for the hindu-arabic decimal system to overcome the roman numeral system in acounting.
It took 350 years for the Catholic Church to exonerate Galelio....
Maybe if we keep the Roman Catholics out of it...
Then there are other issues which are more pressing on the need for change.... Software Patents battle...
What is a framework? (Score:4, Informative)
"... dictates the architecture of your application. It will define the overall structure, its partitioning into classes and objects, the key responsibilities thereof, how the classes and objects collaborate, and the thread of control. A framework predefines these design parameters so that you, the application designer/implementer, can concentrate on your application. The framework captures the design decisions that are common to its application domain."
Erich Gamma et al., Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software.
Quoted from Tapestry in Action by Howard Lewis Ship.
Howard continues: "Frameworks are very useful; instead of your having to start with a clean slate, the design is partially filled in and the path to follow is clear. Many design decisions are already made for you, decisions that leverage the combined experience of the frameworks' authors and users."
And that's why when weighing up JSF or Struts, I chose
What most people use is... (Score:2)
Not a fan of frameworks (Score:2)
community (Score:2)
I first look at the website. (Score:2)
This may sound silly - and it is funny, I admit - but there's a serious end to it.
If the people in charge don't have what it takes to build a website that doesn't look like someone did doo-doo on my screen, chances are their framework and documentation is a pile of half-backed bits and pieces. This is usually true on a larger scale. This rule doesn't apply to non-oss tools though.
When it get's into the details I look at language used, databases su
how to decide on your framework (Score:2)
Will it provide the services you need?
How much of the framework are you willing to write?
How hard is it to integrate your code with the framework?
How easy is it to seperate your code from the framework?
If the chosen framework goes tits-up, how easy will it be to change frameworks?
Does it support the platforms you use?
Would you want to monkey with the framework?
Would you want to contribute your changes to the framework?
2. Support
How many other people outside the company use the framework?
Doe
The ninety seconds rule (Score:2)
You need to have the right lens... (Score:2)
Adaptability
Efficency
Availability of tools (IDEs, Graphical Contruction Wizards, Component analyzers, memory analyzers, profilers)
Robustness (Error checking, logging, etc)
Support Availability
Quickness of Dev Time
Maintainability
Platform Compatability
License Compatability with Product Business Goals (Talk with the Mgmt/Marketing folks about this in terms of which each all
Re:The funny part is... (Score:2)
Re:The funny part is... (Score:2)
That's complete bollocks. EJB is not a wrapper around Corba IIOP.
Re:Use what you know (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Use what you know (Score:2)
Nice line.
Re:Use what you know (Score:2)
seriously, that is wrong. Goatse is dimented, tubgirl is gross. That is
it's been half a minuite and I can't complete the above sentance.
-nB
Re:Fuck struts. (Score:2)
Re:For LAMP/server work (Score:2)