|
|
||
Ed Burns's BlogMarch 2007 ArchivesPre-JCP-filed draft for JavaServer Faces 2.0 JSRPosted by edburns on March 30, 2007 at 08:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (53)It's about time we get moving on JSF 2.0, so Sun's JSF team decided to go public with a pre-JCP-filing of the JSR for JavaServer Faces 2.0. The draft of the document at <https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/proposals/JSF-2_0-draft.html> has been through several rounds of Sun internal review and also was reviewed by the JSF 1.2 Expert Group. Please review the draft and post comments here on this blog. If you want to go even deeper into shaping JSF 2.0 and the JSR submission, you can view and edit the wiki for a JSF 2.0 Requirements Scratchpad document. When the JSR gets rolling, the requirements in that document will be turned into issues in the JavaServer Faces Specification Issue Tracker. Finally, I'd like to take this opportunity to extend an invitation to several individuals outside of the JSF community to join us in developing the next version of the Java standard web application framework. Specifically, I call upon Howard Lewis-Ship, Geert Bevin, Eelco Hillenius, and Tim Fennell to consider Joining the JCP so they can join the Expert Group when it forms. Of course, there are many other folks whose expertise would be appreciated on the Expert Group, but Howard, Geert, Eelco and Tim come to mind because each of them has their own web framework outside of JSF. Please let us know what you think about starting JSF 2.0! Compilllers are HelpfulPosted by edburns on March 12, 2007 at 09:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)When working to revive Webclient
as a means to enable one to write automated tests for Ajax Applications,
I ended up fixing some thread safety assertions that were failing in
native code. Part of this involved slightly recrafting the design of
the native/Java DOM bridge, originally written over seven years ago by
Igor Kushnirsky. Igor's
original design had lots of
into this:
Of course, I would have to modify the function names in the native C++ source files as well. In case you were wondering, I did consider these solutions but rejected them.
That said, I wrote some xemacs macros as I went along and it only took a couple hours of manual editing. While doing it, I re-compiled all along the way. Naturally, the compiler caught some things, which I easily fixed, as I went along. This got me thinking. Say this code was written entirely in a scripting language. If so, this sort of "complicated, human-assisted global search and replace" change (I won't call it refactoring since this particular process was so specific to JNI) would be really error prone and hard to debug. The absence of a type checking compiler would really make this sort of change hard. I assert that this sort of change is happens all the time in the maintenance phase of a large software project. I assert that the person making the change is seldom the same person who wrote the code originally. Given these assertions, I predict much woe for the maintenance programmer who has to do such a change on a scripting language based project. I continue to urge caution for those listening to scripting zealots when they consider moving more of their projects to scripting languages. Technorati Tags: edburns | ||
|
|