Enable javascript in your browser for better experience. Need to know to enable it?

÷ÈÓ°Ö±²¥

La informaci¨®n en esta p¨¢gina no se encuentra completamente disponible en tu idioma de preferencia. Muy pronto esperamos tenerla completamente disponible en otros idiomas. Para obtener informaci¨®n en tu idioma de preferencia, por favor descarga el PDF ²¹±ç³Ü¨ª.
?ltima actualizaci¨®n : May 05, 2015
NO EN LA EDICI?N ACTUAL
Este blip no est¨¢ en la edici¨®n actual del Radar. Si ha aparecido en una de las ¨²ltimas ediciones, es probable que siga siendo relevante. Si es m¨¢s antiguo, es posible que ya no sea relevante y que nuestra valoraci¨®n sea diferente hoy en d¨ªa. Desgraciadamente, no tenemos el ancho de banda necesario para revisar continuamente los anuncios de ediciones anteriores del Radar. Entender m¨¢s
May 2015
Resistir ?

We continue to see teams run into trouble using JSF - JavaServer Faces - and are recommending you avoid this technology. Teams seem to choose JSF because it is a Java EE standard without really evaluating whether the programming model suits them. We think JSF is flawed because its programming model encourages use of its own abstractions rather than fully embracing the underlying web model. JSF, like ASP.NET webforms, attempts to create stateful component trees on top HTML markup and the stateless HTTP protocol. The improvements in JSF 2.0 and 2.2, such as the introduction of stateless views and the promotion of GET, are steps in the right direction, maybe even an acknowledgement that the original model was flawed, but we feel this is a too little too late. Rather than dealing with the complexity of JSF we recommend teams use simple frameworks and work closely with web technologies including HTTP, HTML and CSS.

Jan 2015
Resistir ?
Jul 2014
Resistir ?
We continue to see teams run into trouble using JSF?- JavaServer Faces - and are recommending you avoid this technology. Teams seem to choose JSF because it is a Java EE standard without really evaluating whether the programming model suits them. We think JSF is flawed because its programming model encourages use of its own abstractions rather than fully embracing the underlying web model. JSF, like ASP.NET webforms, attempts to create stateful component trees on top HTML markup and the stateless HTTP protocol. The improvements in JSF 2.0 and 2.2, such as the introduction of stateless views and the promotion of GET, are steps in the right direction, maybe even an acknowledgement that the original model was flawed, but we feel this is a too little too late. Rather than dealing with the complexity of JSF we recommend teams use simple frameworks and work closely with web technologies including HTTP, HTML and CSS.
Jan 2014
Resistir ?
Publicado : Jan 28, 2014

Suscr¨ªbete al bolet¨ªn informativo de Technology Radar

?

?

?

?

Suscr¨ªbete ahora

Visita nuestro archivo para leer los vol¨²menes anteriores