Java Web Framework Changes...

For some time now I have been having major frustrations deciding on a Java Web framework to replace Struts. In the past I have evaluated some alternatives such as some component based Web frameworks such as Tapestry and a little at JSF. Both of these solutions are powerful but can be quite complex. While I understand the benefits of component based frameworks I am not sure that either of these frameworks are absolutely necessary for our environment. So in between Tapestry and Struts there are over 50 other web frameworks that are slight derivatives of Struts, promising frameworks like Wicket with little doco, or strangely named frameworks with little substance. So of these frameworks only two came into consideration - Spring MVC and WebWork. Both of these frameworks are not component based but address the shortcomings of Struts. One of my biggest grips with Struts is having to implement ActionForm objects and dealing with the Action class with it's hard to unit test methods. Just binding Strings to ActionForms and translating those String to my model objects is a huge coding overhead. Spring MVC and WebWork allieviate this problem and add much more value. Both have support for continuations, AJAX, good documentation, Spring integration for actions, Velocity/Freemarker support, and community support. We currently use Spring in our middle tier and Hibernate for our persistence layer. However, we chose WebWork because of the simple configuration, easy to configure interceptors, pluggable view handlers, programmable continuations, and support for other popular frameworks like Spring. Choosing a Java web framework is very difficult and you have to accept that there is no single best choice. That is probably why there are too many already available and more will keep coming until someone gets it right. So our web tier for the forseeable future will now consist of WebWork 2.2 + Freemarker + SiteMesh.

Is Java Dead?

I attended AJUG last night and watched Bruce Tate's presentation about 'Stretching Java'. I have to say that this was a great presentation that addressed old and new dynamic languages such as Smalltalk and Ruby. Bruce did a great job explaining the walls that we as Java developers are running up against with Web development today. Maybe Java is not the golden hammer that we thought it was for Web applications. The presentation included demonstrations with the Ruby language, the Seaside framework, and Ruby on Rails. He followed this up how Java developers need to borrow from the strengths of these technologies via techniques such as AOP, metadata/annotations, and incorporating dynamic languages (such as Jython and JRuby) that can run on a JVM. Also, continuations were covered with an example using the Ruby language. This progressed into applying the concept to handle web flows and avoiding back button issues in the browser. Rails and Seaside have native support for continuations via dynamic languages while we need to be more creative and hackish on the Java side to mimic the concept.

I have already been exposed to Ruby on Rails and I am currently reading the new Pragmatic Programmers book - 'Agile Web Development with Rails'. I am finding that this book is a good read that walks a developer through the process. It is hard to ignore technologies that are as productive as Rails when compared to what I consider a 'lightweight' Java stack to build equivalent Web applications. I consider Struts, Velocity, Spring, and Hibernate a lightweight and productive Java stack for building an end-to-end Web application. However, Web development Ruby on Rails is much faster and elegant compared to any Java stack today.

What is even more frustrating is when I read about technologies JSF. Let's see - we will build a framework (and by the way make it a standard) which is *way* fatter than something like Struts and tell developers that feeding a framework is a good thing. Rails is so much more simple and elegant that JSF from a presentation/MVC perspective. I think that Sun is making a big mistake with this framework. They finally figured out that EJB was bloated and POJOs were good. Now they are going to learn another lesson on the front end. Well, I am not following the piper this time... More than likely I will stick with my lightweight Java stack - Struts, Velocity, Spring, and Hibernate. If I need to do component development in my presentation layer I will choose Tapestry 4.

Finally, towards the end of Bruce's presentation he discussed how 2/3 of his development in mid-2006 will be non-Java. If that is not enough to make you take notice of what is going on around you then I do not know what it would take. How much more can we stretch the Java language before we turn to dynamic languages? Is Java dead or dying a slow death?