I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new
project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use
Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often I
take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to work
and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The idea
of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put
together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity /
readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an outside
perspective.
I've tinkered with Lift a little. It did have some very cool features for
doing server-push stuff, but I didn't find it particularly simple or
intuitive.
I've heard good things about Play (http://www.playframework.org/) and the
demos I've seen make it look very approachable.
-- Matt
On 30 April 2012 12:56, Russell Dunphy <russ...@russelldunphy.com> wrote:
> I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new
> project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use
> Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
> For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often I
> take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to work
> and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The idea
> of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put
> together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity /
> readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
> I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an outside
> perspective.
The typesafe stack includes Play!, so if you do not need some of the features in which Lift excels, I would probably go for Play!.
http://typesafe.com/stack
Tommaso
From: scala-leeds@googlegroups.com [mailto:scala-leeds@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Dunphy
Sent: 30 April 2012 12:57
To: scala-leeds@googlegroups.com
Subject: [scala-leeds] Anyone used Lift much? Need a web framework recommendation
Hi all,
I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often I take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to work and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The idea of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity / readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an outside perspective.
Thanks,
Russell
--
Russell Dunphy | @rsslldnphy<http://twitter.com/rsslldnphy> | rsslldnphy.com<http://russelldunphy.com>
The information included in this email and any files transmitted with it may contain information that is confidential and it must not be used by, or its contents or attachments copied or disclosed, to persons other than the intended addressee. If you have received this email in error, please notify BJSS. In the absence of written agreement to the contrary BJSS' relevant standard terms of contract for any work to be undertaken will apply. Please carry out virus or such other checks as you consider appropriate in respect of this email. BJSS do not accept responsibility for any adverse effect upon your system or data in relation to this email or any files transmitted with it. BJSS Limited, a company registered in England and Wales (Company Number 2777575), VAT Registration Number 613295452, Registered Office Address, First Floor, Coronet House, Queen Street, Leeds, LS1 2TW
Thanks Matt, I've had a look at Play too but basically discarded it after
having lots of difficulty even getting it running (to be fair to Play I was
trying to get it running as part of the typesafe stack and I've heard other
people have had problems with this). I figured that if I was going to have
the overhead of learning a new framework it might as well be completely new
(with all the potential benefits and dangers you'd expect) rather than just
the same thing. However I'm starting to doubt whether any of the Scala
web-frameworks are mature enough to be a sensible choice for work rather
than as a hobby.
Russell
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Matt Russell <mattrussel...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I've tinkered with Lift a little. It did have some very cool features for
> doing server-push stuff, but I didn't find it particularly simple or
> intuitive.
> I've heard good things about Play (http://www.playframework.org/) and the
> demos I've seen make it look very approachable.
> -- Matt
> On 30 April 2012 12:56, Russell Dunphy <russ...@russelldunphy.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new
>> project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use
>> Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
>> For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often
>> I take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to
>> work and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The
>> idea of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put
>> together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity /
>> readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
>> I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an outside
>> perspective.
Having looked briefly into both Lift and Play, I personally prefer the
latter. I haven't used either in anger, however, but I do find Play to have
less of a learning curve, and it does seem to complete on its promise to
enable the common things to be done easily.
Let me know how you get on and what you decide to go with!
Best,
Aaron
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Russell Dunphy
<russ...@russelldunphy.com>wrote:
> I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new
> project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use
> Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
> For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often I
> take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to work
> and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The idea
> of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put
> together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity /
> readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
> I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an outside
> perspective.
Just as an aside, there's a new book "Play for Scala" come out under early
access very recently on Manning. I've bought it but haven't started reading
yet ;-)
> Having looked briefly into both Lift and Play, I personally prefer the
> latter. I haven't used either in anger, however, but I do find Play to have
> less of a learning curve, and it does seem to complete on its promise to
> enable the common things to be done easily.
> Let me know how you get on and what you decide to go with!
> Best,
> Aaron
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Russell Dunphy <
> russ...@russelldunphy.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new
>> project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use
>> Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
>> For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often
>> I take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to
>> work and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The
>> idea of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put
>> together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity /
>> readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
>> I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an outside
>> perspective.
> Just as an aside, there's a new book "Play for Scala" come out under early
> access very recently on Manning. I've bought it but haven't started reading
> yet ;-)
> On 3 May 2012 11:45, Aaron Pritzlaff <aaron.pritzl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Russell,
>> Having looked briefly into both Lift and Play, I personally prefer the
>> latter. I haven't used either in anger, however, but I do find Play to have
>> less of a learning curve, and it does seem to complete on its promise to
>> enable the common things to be done easily.
>> Let me know how you get on and what you decide to go with!
>> Best,
>> Aaron
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Russell Dunphy <
>> russ...@russelldunphy.com> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'm in the process of trying to choose a scala web framework for a new
>>> project at work (or deciding to stick with Rails for the front-end and use
>>> Scala only for the backend). Can anyone recommend one in particular?
>>> For some reason I keep on getting drawn back to Lift, but every so often
>>> I take a look at the sort of code you're expected to write to get it to
>>> work and it looks like I've just vomited nonsense all over the screen. The
>>> idea of it seems potentially very powerful but it seems to have been put
>>> together by a bunch of people who just don't care about simplicity /
>>> readability. Documentation is also very poor if it exists at all.
>>> I'm kind of in a bit of a bubble so could use some advice from an
>>> outside perspective.
