I’m amused, in our project we use .NET for a public website and we use Java for the Client UI and web services. So we have this conversation a lot…
Us Java guys don’t seem phased by having to source open source frameworks to enable logging, unit testing, building, web services, server pages, XML parsing…. 100’s of XML configuration and Java properties files…
The .NET guys are concerned with anything that isn’t already integrated with the language and IDE. So it seems rather similar to the above argument. Which raises a question… should a framework attempt to provide the answer to 90% of the problems, or should a framework provide tools that can be used to solve any related problem, real or imagined?
I think the framework shouldn’t dictate the solution, which allows the architectural team and developers to establish the best approach.
Last 5 posts by James Little- Drew Ginn resting after the Olympics - September 8th, 2008
- Sneakerplay: The social network for sneakers? - September 8th, 2008
- The Waikato Great Race 2008 - September 7th, 2008
- Facebook about to introduce adult content? - September 4th, 2008
- Gradjobs New Zealand is live - September 2nd, 2008
3 Comments
I took a course on Java while in college and I didn’t like it very much. Is Ruby on Rails any easier to use?
I wrote a blog post Java vs. Ruby on Rails that you might enjoy.
That is interesting. I didn’t realise internationalisation support in ruby on rails was so bad. For me internationalisation is quite important, the NZ market isn’t really large enough to warrant large development budgets.