[codecraft] Java EE vs. Play

[Michael Bar-Sinai]

...And then came the migration to Play 2.4, where the static parts are being deprecated, and everything is getting dynamic and dependency injected, and there were quite a few error screens, and stack traces. Not from hell, though*.

* Just finished porting a Play app to 2.4. Not an easy task, even though I like the DI better than Java EE's. Play! still seems to be better-suited for HTTP interfaces, as it does not try to abstract HTTP away. But it's not a clear-winner-by-KO.
IMHO, the main issue with Play! is the tools - IntelliJ is the only IDE to that supports it at the moment. ScalaIDE has some official support, but since I've installed it the JVM crashes (that is, I get the OSX's crash dialog, not even Eclipse's). There's a NetBeans plug-in on the way (http://nbpleasureplugin.com <http://nbpleasureplugin.com/>).  As IntelliJ is expensive, buggy, eats RAM and CPU and is generally annoying, I currently use Sublime text and the console. The amazing part - I'm still quite productive with this setup.

> On 22 Nov 2015, at 13:49, Philip Durbin <philipdurbin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> http://horstmann.com/unblog/2015-11-21/index.html <http://horstmann.com/unblog/2015-11-21/index.html>
> "All work and no play makes Jack a dull programmer. And I just felt the dull pain of another stack trace from hell from my Java EE app server. There has to be a better way. So I ported the troublesome code to run on the Play framework, and it was all play. No stack trace from hell, just a few screens with clear error messages, and then sweet success."
> 
> _______________________________________________
> codecraft mailing list
> codecraft at or8.net
> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/codecraft

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://or8.net/pipermail/codecraft/attachments/20151122/f2411c8a/attachment.html>