Comments on: In defense of J2EE’s complexity http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/ Auriga Logic's Opinionated Weblog Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:40:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Why J2EE is complex « handyfloss http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-211 Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:58:17 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-211 [...] Why J2EE is complex I read in O’Reillynet a comment on AurigaLogic’s Blogic. [...] […] Why J2EE is complex I read in O’Reillynet a comment on AurigaLogic’s Blogic. […]

]]> by: Excellent Presentation on Object Oriented Design, J2EE, and Rapid Turn-Around. « Cornelius — Blog http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-207 Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:46:33 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-207 [...] http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/ Posted by corneliusj Filed in RoR, Ruby, PHP, Technology [...] […] http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/ Posted by corneliusj Filed in RoR, Ruby, PHP, Technology […]

]]> by: Web 2.0 Announcer http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-206 Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:10:12 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-206 <strong>In defense of J2EE’s complexity...</strong> [...]J2EE bashing seems to be the flavour these days. While I do agree that J2EE does seem tedious at times, especially when you compare it with the likes of Ruby on Rails, I still realize (and appreciate) why and how J2EE got to be the way it is.[...]... In defense of J2EE’s complexity…

[…]J2EE bashing seems to be the flavour these days. While I do agree that J2EE does seem tedious at times, especially when you compare it with the likes of Ruby on Rails, I still realize (and appreciate) why and how J2EE got to be the way it is.[…]…

]]> by: Rob Bygrave http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-88 Thu, 04 Jan 2007 07:11:57 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-88 I guess for me J2EE means EJB's rather than Hibernate and Struts etc. I was expecting you to be defending EJB but that does not seem to be the case :) Anyway, I thought I'd add a thought which is that we (as Java developers) need to keep in mind "As Simple as possible but no simpler". Q: Do you really think Hibernate/JPA is as simple as it can be? Me: I don't think so, in that I think we can remove the overhead and complexity of session management for starters (see http://www.avaje.org) Q: Do you really think Struts/Tiles is the most productive web framework? Me: I'm expecting groovy based web frameworks to be a significant improvement. We have a bit to do to catch up in this regard. I guess for me J2EE means EJB’s rather than Hibernate and Struts etc.
I was expecting you to be defending EJB but that does not seem to be
the case :)

Anyway, I thought I’d add a thought which is that we (as Java developers)
need to keep in mind “As Simple as possible but no simpler”.

Q: Do you really think Hibernate/JPA is as simple as it can be?
Me: I don’t think so, in that I think we can remove the overhead and complexity of
session management for starters (see http://www.avaje.org)

Q: Do you really think Struts/Tiles is the most productive web framework?
Me: I’m expecting groovy based web frameworks to be a significant improvement.
We have a bit to do to catch up in this regard.

]]> by: Laurent Szyster http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-23 Thu, 09 Nov 2006 10:05:42 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-23 Hi dormant and all, Yes J2EE can be a pain, but it does not have to. For dormant and the likes, here's less java for more applications: http://developer.berlios.de/projects/less4j/ Because I won’t wait for RubyOnJ2EE, I’m tired of HttpServletSession woes, I can’t take another HellWorld tutorial in 26 steps, I want JSON validation now and performances do matter. Hi dormant and all,

Yes J2EE can be a pain, but it does not have to.

For dormant and the likes, here’s less java for more applications:

http://developer.berlios.de/projects/less4j/

Because I won’t wait for RubyOnJ2EE, I’m tired of HttpServletSession woes, I can’t take another HellWorld tutorial in 26 steps, I want JSON validation now and performances do matter.

]]> by: the_dormant http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-22 Thu, 09 Nov 2006 08:01:57 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-22 It's been 3 weeks now that I go everyday to work and don't dare to write a single line of code. This is my fifth J2EE porject in six years and the only thing I can say is that I didn't get anything back in exchange of the effort I put to learn J2EE and all of its corner sides. Am I a better programmer because I know J2EE, am I a better problem solver? Hell, no. I think I've learned a lot more in the last 2 years playing with CommonLisp, Scheme, Smalltalk, Haskell, Ruby, Python, Erlang, Ocaml, Prolog and even Perl than I will do if I spend all my life using Java/J2EE. How can one still bear using Struts again if (s)he, once, happens to use RoR or Seaside or Django? For classic applications with databases behind(and that's what I do most of the time), it isn't even faster!! anyone watched this screenacst http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov ? Do I really have to re(compile|deploy) every single time I change the code just to make sure that I won't catch a ClassCastException? As I said it's been six years now, and java never stopped taking me for a "BOZO". Ant is for masochists, it became a full programming language by itself with the most annoying syntax ever(that is xml). Let it grow and we will soon have the lisp-macros constructs, xml closures and such things as "Any sufficiently complicated platform contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp." I wonder why we don't use CL instead? Now, I don't want to complain further about java or J2EE. I have to accept it and live with it. It’s been 3 weeks now that I go everyday to work and don’t dare to write a single line of code.
This is my fifth J2EE porject in six years and the only thing I can say is that I didn’t get anything back in exchange of the effort I put to learn J2EE and all of its corner sides.
Am I a better programmer because I know J2EE, am I a better problem solver?
Hell, no.
I think I’ve learned a lot more in the last 2 years playing with CommonLisp, Scheme, Smalltalk, Haskell, Ruby, Python, Erlang, Ocaml, Prolog and even Perl than I will do if I spend all my life using Java/J2EE.

How can one still bear using Struts again if (s)he, once, happens to use RoR or Seaside or Django? For classic applications with databases behind(and that’s what I do most of the time), it isn’t even faster!!
anyone watched this screenacst http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov ?
Do I really have to re(compile|deploy) every single time I change the code just to make sure that I won’t catch a ClassCastException? As I said it’s been six years now, and java never stopped taking me for a “BOZO”.

Ant is for masochists, it became a full programming language by itself with the most annoying syntax ever(that is xml). Let it grow and we will soon have the lisp-macros constructs, xml closures and such things as “Any sufficiently complicated platform contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp.”
I wonder why we don’t use CL instead?

Now, I don’t want to complain further about java or J2EE. I have to accept it and live with it.

]]> by: Mocky http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-20 Wed, 08 Nov 2006 13:03:42 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-20 "Software engineering needs to have a certain barrier to entry to keep BOZOs out." classic! But this is where you lost me: "A knowledgeable team doesn’t require 20 guys even when using J2EE. " Not all software can be written by 5 man teams. There are big projects too, lots of them. “Software engineering needs to have a certain barrier to entry to keep BOZOs out.”

classic! But this is where you lost me:
“A knowledgeable team doesn’t require 20 guys even when using J2EE. ”

Not all software can be written by 5 man teams. There are big projects too, lots of them.

]]> by: Recomended Weekly Link’s (from 08.11.2006) « Dmitry Ulanov’s Opinions http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-19 Wed, 08 Nov 2006 06:07:48 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-19 [...] In defense of J2EE’s complexity J2EE bashing seems to be the flavour these days. While I do agree that J2EE does seem tedious at times, especially when you compare it with the likes of Ruby on Rails, I still realize (and appreciate) why and how J2EE got to be the way it is. [...] […] In defense of J2EE’s complexity J2EE bashing seems to be the flavour these days. While I do agree that J2EE does seem tedious at times, especially when you compare it with the likes of Ruby on Rails, I still realize (and appreciate) why and how J2EE got to be the way it is. […]

]]> by: Nikhil http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-18 Wed, 08 Nov 2006 05:55:02 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-18 Srini, Well put :). Although, I personally think that when a project team size is 20, just 5 are actually doing the work. The rest are to beef up the billing since most IT service companies charge by the man-hour! A knowledgeable team doesn't require 20 guys even when using J2EE. Srini,

Well put :) . Although, I personally think that when a project team size is 20, just 5 are actually doing the work. The rest are to beef up the billing since most IT service companies charge by the man-hour! A knowledgeable team doesn’t require 20 guys even when using J2EE.

]]> by: Srini http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-17 Wed, 08 Nov 2006 02:15:01 +0000 http://blogic.www2.aurigalogic.com/nikhil/2006/11/07/in-defense-of-j2ees-complexity/#comment-17 Dan: As development teams grow, few bugs are prevented by type-checking. You tend to get a lot more functional and intent bugs, especially for data-driven apps. A compiler just isn't that much help, compared to asserts and unit tests. Besides, with dynamically typed languages, you'll only need 5 developers, not 20. :) Dan: As development teams grow, few bugs are prevented by type-checking. You tend to get a lot more functional and intent bugs, especially for data-driven apps. A compiler just isn’t that much help, compared to asserts and unit tests.

Besides, with dynamically typed languages, you’ll only need 5 developers, not 20. :)

]]>