Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

How Do You Decide Which Framework to Use?

Posted by Cliff on Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:35 PM
from the evaluation-criteria dept.
Programming IT
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:
  1. perceived ease of use (e.g. easy to learn, easy to adapt)
  2. perceived usability (e.g. improving developer performances, reducing work, faster development),
  3. perceived sustainability (e.g. perceived long term support, supporting standards, clear project directions) and
  4. perceived fit to specific developer requirements (e.g. suited language, suited functions, suited architecture).
What are your criteria? Do you support the factors listed above? I am not asking for a preference on a specific software framework, but rather an explanation on the non-trivial task of framework selection, which might be very usable for both frameworks developers and framework users."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] JSF vs ASP.net 107 comments
DuncanE asks: "We are looking at migrating an old legacy database application to a newer web based framework for the front end. For me the two obvious choices are ASP.net vs Java Server Faces. CodeGuru has side by side look at both, but does anyone have any real world comparisons? ASP.net appears to be MS only, which is a concern, depending on how mature mod_mono has become." Which framework would you prefer to use? Under what situations and conditions would you recommend the use of the other?
[+] Developers: Struts Survival Guide 113 comments
Wilson Fereira writes "The Jakarta Struts framework is undoubtedly the most popular MVC framework for developing web applications in J2EE. A lot of books have emerged to satisfy the appetite of avid Struts reader including the two famous books from O'Reilly and Manning Publications. Struts Survival Guide: Basics to Best Practices (SSG) is a new addition to the already growing list of Struts books. SSG is from a new comer in the publishing business - ObjectSource Publications." Read on for the rest of Fereira's review.
[+] News: Hibernate - A J2EE Developers Guide 244 comments
Simon P. Chappell writes with a review of the Addison Wesley-published Hibernate - A J2EE Developers Guide. "To quote the project website: 'Hibernate is a powerful, ultra-high performance object/relational persistence and query service for Java.' To quote the back cover of the book: 'Now there's a practical, hands-on guide to using Hibernate's flexible, fast object/relational persistence and query services.' Phew! What a lot of spin packed into two sentences. Let's take a look and see if it delivers." Read on for the rest of Chappell's review.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

How Do You Decide Which Framework to Use? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Easy to decide... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by moronikos (595352) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:43PM (#14790440) Journal
    You use the one your boss tells you that you are going to use.
    • So true! I worked at a place where our boss decided that every framework class was to be wrapped in a bespoke wrapper with a slightly polluted API, meaning all my skills were unportable and my pay check never rose too high (until I quit).

      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...

    • What if you're said boss and need to pick out some possible frameworks for use? Somebody has to make the decision somewhere along the line of management.

      • 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.

  • I would've thought things like prototype.js and ruby on rails would be better examples of frameworks in proliferate use today than those provided in the blurb.

    but then again i could just be karma whoring. so whatever!
    • Do you also think linux is easy enough for your grandmother? Do you also think ogg vorbis has widespread use?

      I think you've spent too much time on slashdot.

    • You would of thought wrong.

      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)

        by Trejkaz (615352)

        "Can you name any website or application currently in production that does."

        The Rails Wiki [rubyonrails.org] has a list.

        • They have to have a special page on the framework's official website to answer the question, "So, who the heck even uses this framework?" And then they give examples like "BellyButton.com" (maternity site). And that's supposed to be proof that it's good enough for mission-critical production use?
        • From the list(and I saw the other one as well), it has been implemented at largely small places similar to how linux was first deployed. The best I saw on the list was a Newspaper which my friend works at a Newspaper so I know that the person who did it was probably one of the only technical person there.

          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.
        • Ruby on Rails sets off like a Cimmerian for conquest.
          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)

    by croddy (659025) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:45PM (#14790455)
    Personally, I'd pick Ruby on Rails. Not that I have any technical reason to prefer it, mind you... but man, it's so jam-packed with alliterative goodness and it's all Web 2.0'ed out and shit. And it has some crap called a scaffold. Do you have any idea how many struts it takes to build just one scaffold? No? Well it takes a lot!!

  • Difficult to answer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IntelliAdmin (941633) * on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:49PM (#14790473) Homepage
    This is almost as bad as asking "What programming language to use for a project" It all depends on the needs and experience of those involved. Sometimes it means rolling your own, other times it is better to get one that has been fully tested in the field for some time. Either way it is a silly question to ask.

    • Re:Difficult to answer (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tony Hoyle (11698) <tmh@nodomain.org> on Friday February 24 2006, @12:04AM (#14790538) Homepage
      More to the point, the design will answer the question for you (as it does for the 'what programming language' question).

      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.
    • I wouldnt' say silly. The specifics of the question itself if silly, but the overall question can be discussed vagely enough. And unfortunately, answered vagely as well.

      You can pretty much ignore this, as I am kinda just doing a self ping for a later read ;)
    • No, I think this is a great question to ask: regardless of language (and hype), a framwork - at least for me - has to help me with the following:

      - 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
    • So the answer to the submission is "Whatever is needed." Another pointless article.

      • Re:Difficult to answer (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Dlugar (124619) on Friday February 24 2006, @12:32AM (#14790634) Homepage
        So the answer to the submission is "Whatever is needed." Another pointless article.

        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

  • Framework schmamework (Score:5, Insightful)

    by quantum bit (225091) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:50PM (#14790479) Journal
    I've played with a bunch of frameworks based on Java, Ruby, Python, etc... However for my last few projects I decided to go "old school". Since the target platform was Windows, that meant plain C and Win32 API. No MFC or anything. Staticly linked libpq if I need database access. Extra plus is that without C++ or COM frameworks, I can use mingw gcc on my BSD workstation to cross-compile.

    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.
    • Another upside is that there's no one but you who can fix or maintain it! ;-)
      • Haha, well that may or may not be an upside, but I consider that a quality-assurance measure. After all, any competent and intelligent programmer or engineer will be able to figure it out. It's only the java-monkeys with paper certs and degrees in meta-theory who have never touched any real code (without 3+ layers of abstraction) in their life that will be lost. ;)
    • an app that uses 10's of megs!?! you mean like, on a SERVER!?!
      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?
  • ...on your budgetary constraints, whether you're willing to invest in expensive frameworks that you have to pay for over and over again, or go FOSS. It will also depend on your company's systems. Some frameworks have relatively steep requirements.

    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)

    by gadzook33 (740455) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:56PM (#14790504)
    Evaluate each one based on what's important to you. What language do you use? What platforms do you support? What libraries do you incorporate vs write yourself? I'm not sure there are shortcuts to answering any of these.

  • Why I Hate Frameworks - a popular article (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hermank (101000) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:58PM (#14790507)
    Hmm.... I think you should read this first, in case you didn't. http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel .3.219431.12 [joelonsoftware.com]

    • Re:Why I Hate Frameworks - a popular article (Score:4, Interesting)

      by russellh (547685) on Friday February 24 2006, @01:19AM (#14790776) Homepage
      snarky. reminds me of why I dislike joel on software.

      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! ..but to answer the poster's question, first choose a language that best matches your problem domain, ensuring (hopefully) the minimum size of the framework and minimizing philosophical contradictions between it and the host language.

  • Do you really need a framework? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wrook (134116) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:58PM (#14790508) Homepage
    I think the very first question you should ask yourself is, do you really need a framework?

    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 .Net or the JRE around. Are you sure you want to upgrade all the apps all at the same time?

    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.

    • 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 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

  • My criteria (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TrappedByMyself (861094) on Thursday February 23 2006, @11:58PM (#14790509)
    1) Established - Needs to be stable and in heavy use. New stuff is fun to play with, but not an option for paying customers.
    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.
  • I had written out a fairly complex post about how you need to pick "the right tool for the job" but you already knew all that crap-- if you don't need to enforce MVC, don't bother with Struts, etc.

    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

  • perceived ease of use (e.g. easy to learn, easy to adapt)
    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
  • I wait a year or so to see which ones come out a sure winner before picking up on it.

    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.
  • I've been thinking about software architecture for a while now and it's even more important in the case of a framework. I realized from using my own architecture and seeing its own flaw that a design that flows naturally from the way a person thinks is usually easy to use and coherent. What I mean is that when I'm using some part of a framework (like .Net) and I need to do something new, I would often go online and research it really quick like searching for a node using XPath when using the XML parser cl

  • Use what everybody else is using (Score:3, Funny)

    by burris (122191) on Friday February 24 2006, @12:12AM (#14790576)
    If it is really popular, it must be really good. See C++, Java, XML, Windows, McDonalds, etc...

  • Here is how my boss did (Score:5, Funny)

    by 2Bits (167227) on Friday February 24 2006, @12:13AM (#14790577)
    That reminds me of a (quite large) project a few years ago. We were deciding what language to use, what framework, what methodology, etc. And the boss asked:"How many frameworks can we use in the project?" We gave a few, and he wrote down one himself. He then drew one on each corner of a paper, put his pencil in the middle, and spinned. It pointed to COBOL, which is the one he wrote down.

    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 :)

  • If you use Scheme, you don't need a framework -- it is powerful enough.

    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.

  • Good question. (Score:3, Funny)

    by deep44 (891922) on Friday February 24 2006, @12:35AM (#14790646)
    I usually start by asking myself, "what programming language am I most familiar with?" .. then, once I have that figured out, I spam "Ask Slashdot" until they post my question. By then, I've already lost interest and/or forgot about the reason for needing an application framework in the first place, so I close the loop by replying to the question with a completely offtopic (yet slightly humorous) comment.

    That's just me, though. YMMV.

  • Frameworks? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Theatetus (521747) on Friday February 24 2006, @12:48AM (#14790680) Journal

    *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...

  • Documentation! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by metamatic (202216) on Friday February 24 2006, @12:56AM (#14790704) Homepage Journal
    The first thing I do is try to browse the documentation. If there isn't any, or it's no good, I eliminate the framework right there and then. (That kills SWT/Eclipse.)

    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.
  • There are so many criteria you have to consider that are so situational specific that it would be near impossible to write down the complete guideline. But I think there are a few solid guidelines to start with or consider.

    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.

  • I'm starting to sour on frameworks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jerf (17166) on Friday February 24 2006, @02:07AM (#14790946) Journal
    I've been developing for about ten years now; not as long as some people, but enough to be getting over the ten year [norvig.com] hump for competency. As a result, I don't expect that everybody can pick this idea up and run with it, but it might color how you look at the frameworks.

    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:
    1. The resulting framework is quite often nearly impenetrable to an outsider, so when it's wrong, it's really, really wrong; even an open source framework might be of only dubious value since you're unlikely to be able to unravel all of the pieces in any useful amount of time.
    2. As you add pieces together, the complexity of the whole increases geometrically. (Not "exponentially" as the term is commonly abused.) This can be mitigated by maturity, both of framework or core developer, but that's more rare than you might think. But the thing is, you are very unlikely to need all of the pieces. If the framework does 40 things, at a complexity of 1600, but you only need to use it for 12 things, at a complexity of 144, you're gaining an awful lot of complexity. (The numbers are of course made up, but the idea holds; don't try to over-rationalize the figures.) What's worse, as mentioned in the previous point, you might want to do 3 things that the framework fights you on, and now you're either going to have to give up on those 3 things, make unbelievably ugly hacks to get each of them half-sort-of working, or scale a huge learning curve to fix the framework that you are now significantly invested in, but know effectively nothing about the insides.

    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

    • The parent post made an important point, worth highlighting. Limitations. The "things that the framework fights you on" (quote from parent). Not what the framework just does not do, but what it effectively _prevents_ you from doing, or at least makes you jump through hoops to achieve it.

      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

  • What is a framework? (Score:4, Informative)

    by SickLittleMonkey (135315) on Friday February 24 2006, @02:54AM (#14791067) Homepage
    A framework ...

    "... 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 ... Tapestry!
    • You do realize that EJB is a back-end technology, and is often deployed in conjuction with Struts? Also, the VB reference makes no sense since EJB is actually a wrapper around Corba IIOP.

    • Re:Simplicity is key (Score:5, Informative)

      by Serveert (102805) on Friday February 24 2006, @01:27AM (#14790805)
      HQL has major limitations but you can rip out into native SQL using createSQLQuery() I believe. Map it into a hibernate class and you're golden.

      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.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.