Application Generation - Frameworks

Coldbox 2.5 - Early Christmas Present!

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:01:00 -0400

Luis and his team of elves have been busily preparing Coldbox 2.5 and it looks like they managed to ship a little early for Christmas this year. Check it out!

Check Out Fusebox and Scaffolding

Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:35:00 -0400

I just wanted to point to some of the great work that Kevin Roche has done on the Fusebox scaffolding. I know that there are lots of other frameworks out there, but Fusebox is definitely worth checking out. It doesn't require OO developers, provides good MVC separation, and the latest version it has some very cool magic from the curmudgeon himself that makes it worth checking out the underlying code even if you don't use the framework for some of your projects. Who knows, it might even save your job!

Check out Rails 2.0 - even if you don't want to use it!

Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:50:00 -0400

In case you don't know, Rails 2.0 is now out. I'm actually not a huge Rails fan. It's opinionated software and I'm an opinionated programmer - things just wouldn't work out between us! That said, skimming through the feature lists I've already found some things I did ages ago, some that I was planning to do now, and some that I'll be adding to my task list as I think they are great ideas.

A Comparison of Web Application Frameworks . . .

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:38:00 -0400

It won't tell you which one to use for your use case, but at least wikipedia has a decent list of MVC web application frameworks - including most of the main ColdFusion ones. Check it out.

Coldbox and Lightwire

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:10:00 -0400

One of the many stories I didn't get a chance to mention recently was the great efforts by Aaron Roberson and Luis Majano. LightWire is now a supported DI engine in Coldbox. Great work guys - many thanks!

Dissecting Mach-II

Thu, 09 Aug 2007 09:22:00 -0400

Brian Rinaldi just did a great post dissecting how Mach-II actually works. It is only part 1 so it focuses on the load up process, but it is a great resource and puts all the nice new 1.5 features in context. Only problem is that it was a lot of work, so if you want him to complete the series, please comment and let him know!

Where Should the Automagic Go?

Sun, 17 Jun 2007 13:49:00 -0400

I've been rebuilding my framework (again). The last cut was pretty good, allowing a small number of simple methods to specify most of the functionality for common web applications declaratively. It used a lot of automagic and convention over configuration to allow a very DRY set of metadata to create applications quickly and easily. But as I played with it I started to feel something wasn't quite right . . . [More]

Rails, Cats and DSLs

Sun, 17 Jun 2007 13:42:00 -0400

Sam picked up on an interesting article and Sean put together a great response. I just wanted to look at the discussion from the perspective of Domain Specific Languages to provide another way of looking at such issues . . . [More]

A Comparitive Review of Python Frameworks

Mon, 28 May 2007 12:05:00 -0400

This article is a really nice comparitive review of a number of different Python frameworks (both full stack and more focused). Even if you have no interest in Python, it provides a really good overview of some different approaches to thinking about web application frameworks. So, who's going to write the CF companion?!

Web framework Manifesto

Sat, 03 Mar 2007 14:53:00 -0400

While I don't agree with every point, I think the Web Framework Manifesto gives a good sense of some of thing I expect to see in a framework (and plan to include in LightBase). Some of the "independent UI components" while still allowing the back button to "do the right thing" is a pain to implement in a language without closures and a server memory hog in any application, but they are all things I'm pondering for version 2.0 of LightBase (i.e. I'm considering them but not coding them yet). Right now I'm focused on the basics like a DI engine and ORM rolled just the way I like it as well as my page controller model, composable views, automated handling of mapping of form fields for single or multiple object forms and generation of "first cut" of everything so you can just extend and customize if you want. I think it is safe to say there is still plenty of room for both existing frameworks to extend the scope of what they do and for new frameworks exploring different metaphors. I think there is also a place for frameworks that keep true to a central vision and (for instance) stay solidly in the MVC space. DHH noted that Rails is not the "one true framework" as the more problems your framework solves, the less suited it is to each problem, so frameworks optimized for subsets of use cases will make more sense for people whose use cases consistenly fall within those spaces whereas more generalized frameworks will fit better for people with a wider range of needs who are prepared to spend a little more time on each project in return for a framework that provides them with more flexibility. I think the next couple of years are going to be really exciting times as we look at all of the frameworks (especially outside of the CF world) and move the CF frameworks world to the next level. What are you working on or hoping for in terms of ColdFusion frameworks and features?

GREAT Overview of types of frameworks

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:56:00 -0400

Probably nothing new for most readers of this blog, but Brian Rinaldi posted a great introduction to the various classes and types of frameworks. Check it out, so the next time someone asks you "should I use Reactor or Mach-II" you'll know where to point them to!

We Don't Need Frameworks - We Need Editors

Sun, 25 Feb 2007 13:19:00 -0400

Following on from my last posting, I do believe there is something rotten in the state of frameworks. But it isn't too many frameworks, it is the lack of trusted editors . . . [More]

Should you Release Your Framework?

Sun, 25 Feb 2007 12:33:00 -0400

So, you've written your own framework, but a recent posting by Sean made me more explicitly ask the question: "just because you've written a framework, does that mean you should release it"? Recent exchanges with Dave Ross also made me question when you should write a new framework vs. contributing to an existing one (it appears that I am not a "team player" because I didn't ask to join the ColdSpring team) :-< . . . [More]

Just choose one, darn it

Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:30:00 -0400

Brian hops into the dull and uncontentious topic of frameworks with a posting that I think everyone should read and I'd imagine most people would (on reflection) agree with. Great advice if someone is trying to figure out which framework to use and it also clears up the common misconception that there are just "frameworks" as opposed to MVC, ORM and DI frameworks each of which is solving a completely different set of problems.

Steve Nelson Strikes Again!

Mon, 05 Feb 2007 11:13:00 -0400

The vastly entertaining (and very smart) Steve Nelson has just posted more info from his presentation. A bunch of good ideas, lousy ideas and general rabble rousing all merged into an interesting approach. Thoroughly worth checking out. I posted my comments which pretty much summarize what I like/dislike about his approach.