Board index » jbuilder » Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Ali Kamal
JBuilder Developer |
Ali Kamal
JBuilder Developer |
Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?2003-09-03 01:04:26 PM jbuilder14 Does anyone here prefer to write "Delphi-Style" Java? Essentially you would write Java code but be able to build your J2EE application using many rich UI controls, objects, functions that are just like Delphi. This would leverage your Delphi skills and enable you to build a sandard J2EE application with HTML front-end that has a very rich UI. Roughly 80% of the Java code would be automatically generated for you and you would work mostly in JBuilder's Design view rather than Source view. Thanks, Ali |
Ali Kamal
Java Developer |
2003-09-03 01:06:15 PM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Does anyone here prefer to write "Delphi-Style" Java? Essentially you would write Java code but be able to build
your J2EE application using many rich UI controls, objects, functions that are just like Delphi. This would leverage your Delphi skills and enable you to build a sandard J2EE application with HTML front-end that has a very rich UI. Roughly 80% of the Java code would be automatically generated for you and you would work mostly in JBuilder's Design view rather than Source view. Thanks, Ali |
WongChiHung
Java Developer |
2003-09-03 03:43:44 PM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
80% of code? I dont think so~
"Ali Kamal" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message Quote
UI. Roughly 80% of the Java code would be automatically generated for you and you would work mostly in JBuilder's Design view rather than Source view. Quote
{smallsort} |
pNichols
Java Developer |
2003-09-04 12:13:39 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Ali Kamal wrote:
Quote
HTTP is a stateless protocols, so you do not have anything resembling event driven programming (as in Swing or Delphi's TForm, TEdits, etc). Hopefully, this can change somewhat with Java Server Faces, and is semi possible with struts (though there are no visual designers for struts, AFAIK). You could, of course, do something similar to this using applets, but you are going to hit the applet sandbox issues pretty quickly. If you code sign the applets, of course, you can make this work to a degree. You can also opt for Java Web Start, which is better than0applets, IMHO. thinlets offer some possibilities for whad you seek, FWIU. I have not used them, so I am not speaking from experience. Prhaps someone else has and can relate their ufvectiveness. Radding Session and Entity beans can be done through the JB designer, but drag and dropping these onto a JPanel, or quickly connecting them to a JTextField, JTextArea, etc, I do not know how you would do this without investing alot of work to create such a JTextField bound EJB connection. Yes, it is possible, and would not be a bad idea, IMHO. As one who grew up with Delphi and then started using Java 5 years ago (while still doiung Delphi as well), I do not really know how you "Delphi" code Java 2EE. The two are meant for two different models, unless you are speaking of Swing related applications. If so, these abilities already exist in JBuilder, Net Beans, and Oracle JDeveloper, but not for Java 2EE. In fact, RAD is difficult in Delphi for Server Centric programming as well. |
Ali Kamal
Java Developer |
2003-09-04 01:52:08 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
I believe JBuilder can automatically generate roughly 5-10% of the code. Am I correct? I have seen IBM's New Rational Developer (Model-Driven Development) that can generate up to 80% of the code. I was at a conference where they built the Java Pet Store with only 300 lines of code.
Ali "WongChiHung" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote: Quote80% of code? I dont think so~ |
Ali Kamal
Java Developer |
2003-09-04 02:02:53 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Great comments. Yes, this would be an RAD J2EE development and you are doing event-driven programming. It is possible to keep the state at the client even with HTTP and without a persistent connection. A pre-built framework fo rich controls, objects, functions, is provided that eliminate a lot of the things that are time consuming and you would need to build yourself typically, such as the JTextField bound EJB connection you mentioned. You essentially would build a client/server style J2EE application that gets deployed as an n-tier HTML application (front-end is only HTML and JavaScript), without having to worry about Web-centric issues, such as state management, etc. Would you prefer to build applicaitons this way? How soon do you think this vision will be realized by the J2EE community, such as JSF and BEA's AOP?
Ali pNichols < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote: QuoteAli Kamal wrote: |
Paul Furbacher [TeamB]
Java Developer |
2003-09-04 02:28:41 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
In < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >pNichols wrote:
QuoteAli Kamal wrote: whether Ali is asking a question or proposing a solution. However, he touches on a more general aspect of the state of Java: for all its object orientation, there is a dearth of components. JDJ has an op-ed piece on just this issue: Where are the Components? sys-con.com/java/article.cfm QuoteHTTP is a stateless protocols, so you do not have anything resembling framework, an alternative to Struts, which indeed has an event mechanism: barracuda.enhydra.org/cvs_source/Barracuda/docs/vision.html Note that Barricuda is based on templates, not JSPs, for presentation. They speak of a template engine component, but it represents a rather mild dependence on components. QuoteHopefully, this can change somewhat with Java Server Faces, and is what such components really mean to developers. Other Web application frameworks are already based on components -- e.g., Apple's Web Objects and its open source alternative, Tapestry. jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/ (I stress _already_, since JavaServer Faces is _still_ not production ready.) QuoteYou could, of course, do something similar to this using applets, the "backend". Quotethinlets offer some possibilities ... just a means of serializing the user interface. The real issue is "why are we re-writing the same generic-izable stuff over and over in Java, especially in the J2EE arena?" What really is needed in terms of components are some of the following: 1. authentication components, 2. account management components, 3. order management component. 4. others? These would be drop-in, configurable by property inspectors, generalized components. Quote[...] I do not really know how you as pointed out by Ottinger (author of article cited above) is the disarray that Sun has managed to keep the Java world in: for example, JavaBeans may have originally been meant to foster a component industry, but Sun undermined all of that when it made Swing so untoolable, and by relegating the definition of a JavaBean to "a class which has a no-parameter constructor, and getter/setter methods." For an idea as to where the software industry should have already arrived, look for a copy of Brad Cox's now ancient book, "Object-oriented Programming, An Evolutionary Approach", published by Addison-Wesley (it may be out of print now but used copies may be found). Cox's Web site has some links of interest: www.virtualschool.edu/cox/ (See his publications page, as well.) Here's a link which is totally off-topic for this thread, but may be of interest to some: www.virtualschool.edu/lang/objectivec/influenceOnJava.html Paul Furbacher [TeamB] Save time, search the archives: info.borland.com/newsgroups/ngsearch.html Is it in Joi Ellis's Faq-O-Matic? www.visi.com/~gyles19/fom-serve/cache/1.html Finally, please send responses to the newsgroup only. That means, do not send email directly to me. Thank you. |
John McGrath [TeamB]
Java Developer |
2003-09-04 02:28:27 PM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
On 9/3/2003 at 1:06:15 AM, Ali Kamal wrote:
QuoteDoes anyone here prefer to write "Delphi-Style" Java? info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html -- Regards, John McGrath [TeamB] --------------------------------------------------- Before sending me e-mail, please read: www.JPMcGrath.net/newsgroups/e-mail.html |
pNichols
Java Developer |
2003-09-05 02:27:33 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Paul Furbacher [TeamB] wrote:
QuoteIn < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >pNichols wrote: QuoteHowever, he touches on a more general aspect of the back end structure as an integrated whole. You are forced to go to the "build and immediate test" method for each and every JSP to Controller mechanism you code. This is very time consuming and costly in terms of development cost. The only other (poor) alternative, is to code everything in the JSPs and/or create many custom taglibs that will allow you to embed the taglibs into the HTML based JSPs to handle a semi state management on the HTML based controls, or include JavaScript code in these TagLibs to take care of simple things in form validation, OnClick, Mouse events, etc. That is why building a Java application using Swing or SWT is usually 5 times faster than creating the same JSP application. JSP is not hard to do, but creating everything from scratch for your site, either in a Struts type framework or creating your own custom tags and the constant test between the communication of the JSP to the Servlets/Taglibs, is a royal pain. Throw EJB into the mix and it even gets harrier. I certainly agree we ought to have more components available to standardize a RAD way of doing J2EE Development. My address was not meant to be a "what would be super nice", but rather to address the current state of affairs. Quote>HTTP is a stateless protocols, so you do not have anything resembling another problem in the mix;-- very little centralized management of sub projects. Jakarta/Apache does a great job of finding palatable solutions, but the acceptance and standards process of using all of these technologies is so fragemented that it requires a team to do nothing but look at new technologies every week, to see what is useful and doable. I would much rather have a set of standards that is promoted by a central authority and validated as useful and the general direction we should go due to usefulness and proven testing. We have Struts, Barracuda, Velocity, JSTL, and JSP 1.x-2.x standards,and the coming Java Server Faces, all which will use different scripting mechanisms. There is no way to keep up with it all and at the same time, get any real work done. QuoteNote that Barricuda is based on templates, not JSPs, for Quote>Hopefully, this can change somewhat with Java Server Faces, and is QuoteOther Web application frameworks are already based on components -- QuoteWhat really is needed in terms of components are some Quote2. account management components, Quote3. order management component. Quote4. others? on Java Script. I do not see this happening until the Browser manufacturers comply. Since MS will not do so under any cirsumstances, we are stuck where we are. I do think that if Netscape had remained the dominent player, we would have a more standards based browser that would incorporate these added features. But since MS is only interested in promoting MS and MS based solutions, and as long as MS rules on the Desktops, we are stuck with what MS will and will not support. Of course, we are in a totally different scenario on the server side. Have a good one Paul and thanks for the comments. |
pNichols
Java Developer |
2003-09-05 02:34:06 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Ali Kamal wrote:
Quote
non adherence to any real standards, cripple many could be efforts in the long run. As long as MS remains the overwhelmingly predominent player, MS will support and promote only MS based and MS bound solutions. Can we imagine what would happen if Mozilla became the predominent player? Would they create such standards for Java and PHP that the browser would automatically use, support. and recognize? Probably, but until MS has 50% or less marketshare, this will not happen. Look at MS' plans for Office 2003. They want to proprietize the Documents produced and even require an MS server to use the Office suite. Does that benefit the user community? Of course not, but if they are successful, it certainly helps pad MS' sales and profits and therfore its bottom line. |
Iman L Crawford
Java Developer |
2003-09-05 02:46:41 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Paul Furbacher [TeamB] < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
QuoteI'm not sure that it follows that since HTTP is stateless, pick and choose which parts you want to use. QuoteNote that Barricuda is based on templates, not JSPs, for work. One thing that could be taken as a negative is a reliance on XMLC. We're working towards using any DOM implentations. -- Iman Well, it’s never “happily ever after?because “happily ever after?is you die. You know, it’s “long enough ever after.?You just deteriorate, and, then, you die. - Harvey Pekar |
Iman L Crawford
Java Developer |
2003-09-05 02:50:03 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
pNichols < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
QuoteCan we www.mozdev.org/ mab.mozdev.org/ is a great example of how that framework could be used. -- Iman Well, it’s never “happily ever after?because “happily ever after?is you die. You know, it’s “long enough ever after.?You just deteriorate, and, then, you die. - Harvey Pekar |
pNichols
Java Developer |
2003-09-05 06:14:49 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Iman L Crawford <ilcrawford.at.hotmail.dot.com>wrote:
QuotepNichols < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in promote. Since Internet Explorer has a user base of 90% plus, using standards supported by any other browser regulates that your dependent code is usuable only in an intranet setting, not as a Internet solution. Therein lies the major problem. The only way to overcome these limitations, is through the use of some plug-in archictecture, which again will stymie general usage. Many users are on dial-up connections and an 8 meg download of a plug-in to run your application, requires users not only the time that the bandwidth limitation invokes, but also you, the developer and sistributor, must to be assuried, that the end users install the plug-in correctly. That requires a major burden of usability to be shifted to the user. Overall, this is not a good requirement, and would mandate that the product you produce have limited target scope and/or use many resources for help desk type support. The only way I see these limitations to be overcome, is for marketshare to shift. MS currently, has no incentive to support common standards. They can support their own proprietary standards, which users follow, simply because they use, by default, the MS OS which is tied so closely to MS Intenet Explorer. Unless and until the MS marketshare is cut to a point where MS has no choice but to support open standsrds (not speaking of Open Source per se, but rather open standards), or lose further business opportunities, I do not see this changing. That is only one reason why I think we need an OS that is not tied to a company who is also in the application business. If one company (whoever it may be), also benefits from the applications that run only on that OS, then any company rightfully, would want to lock their customer base into proprietary standards that promote not only the sale of their own OS, but also the products that are tied to that OS. Just common business practice to support and promote your own over and above the competition. MS isn't evil in their pursuits, they are actually practical from a business point of view. Does this mean innovation and better solutions are stifled in the free market? Of course it does. But MS nor any other commercial firm will be concerned about a level playing field, they are interested instead of protecting and growing their own business model. That is why I think the only way to have a level playing field and let the best technology compete without limitations tied to a single source or entity. Since no one owns Linux for instance, the developers are free to exploit the Linux technology in a way that makes innovative technoloy the goal, rather than self-promotion. However, there are caveats to that picture and/or scenario. I can certainly see how Open Source as a threat to programmers making a living in the long run, so I do see the case(es) of companies and the development communities that have a problem with Open Source. But in the OS arena, I also see where Open Source has the greatest potential of leveling the playing field, at least until someone comes up with a better model where application development and innovations are not tied to single company. If the OS is non promotional in the business sense of the model and no one company or companies have a vested interest in promoting the OS for profit, then the application community is free to innovate and make the better technologies the choice, not a for profit motivation. That is NOT TO SAY that the companies producing the applications or technology is not free to profit from their products or development, but rather that the underlying OS upon which it runs, is open to all to compete for innovation sake. In other words, the underlying hardware to software communication is open and free for anyone to improve and exploit, it is not under the control of a single entity to use, change, and create properietary tie-ins that naturaly gives the company that produces it a distinct advantage over everyone else. That is what currently exists, and it is not the best route or way to go to improve the IT community at large. Why? Because we are at the nercy of that single entity, whoever it may be, to support competing technologies which may offer better solutions, but is not in the interest of supporting a business model that could prove (and eventually would) be self-defeating to the owning entity. My hope therefore, is that Linux or something like it, take hold and create absolute necessities for other companies (in this case MS), to support standards that are beneficial to either OS and to the community at large. But until this happens, we are not totally free to innovate, but rather accomodate or create less than perfect solutions. |
Amir Pashazadeh
Java Developer |
2003-09-08 08:16:36 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
Hi,
in a J2EE application UI is not 80% of the code, I don't think in a typical J2EE application UI exceed 20%, (even less on web-services, or web-based apps.), by the way there are now many tools that generate much of J2EE based source codes (for example EJB interface/home).... by the way do you have any tool like Delphi for generating J2EE codes? Amir Pashazadeh "Ali Kamal" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message Quote
UI. Roughly 80% of the Java code would be automatically generated for you and you would work mostly in JBuilder's Design view rather than Source view. Quote
|
brubble
Java Developer |
2003-09-14 05:14:08 AM
Re:Anybody Prefer to Write Delphi-Style Java?
I would take vendor demonstrations with a grain silo of salt. Code
generators provide many benefits but they are filling in for the lack of coherent language hierarchy. There's Java and then you customize the rest. There are now vertically integrated languages but rather high-level APIs. We need both and that is the gap filled by modeling tools that are also code generators. BTW, what gets genenerated usually requires the brain power of an ameoba. That is why a higher level language, not a model transducer, will have to be introduced. The mistake is that we get high-level languages that also implement, very badly, everything in the low level language. How about a new language bound to Java, say, Jumbo. Vertical flavors of Jumbo could also be developed. We have all of this already but as an incoherent collection of vendor-defined products. As for Delphi-like, what is it about the Delphi syntax that would make it better than Java? Are you not really just speaking about an IDE and a component framework? There is nothing about object-pascal that lends itself better to this sort of thing than Java does. |