Paranacoe DAO & Warp
Dave Rapin
I've played around with Paranco in the past and I really like the
concepts behind it. It really simplifies the DAO layer.
Lucio, you may want to take a look at Warp which is doing something
pretty similar but using Google Guice instead of Spring for DI:
http://www.wideplay.com/
http://www.wideplay.com/guicewebextensions2
http://groups.google.com/group/warp-core
The main contributor, Dhanji, is pretty active.
I would love to see a combined DAO abstraction for these two projects
and also another one called Krank. He main contributor Rick is pretty
active.
http://code.google.com/p/krank/
There are a lot of similarities between these projects and I think if
there was some collaboration, at least at the persistence layer, much
could be achieved.
Lucio Benfante
thank You very much for your interest in Parancoe, and for the
references in your email. Very interesting projects.
The warp-persistence project is very similar to the Parancoe
persistence, and there are some nice ideas. I don't know if a
collaboration could be possible (who knows...maybe you can act as common
contact, as you know all three frameworks...), but I will surely be
inspired by it....mostly the annotations at method level and at
parameter level...but I still like the (maybe default) Parancoe
conventions from the method name. :)
Krank...its persistence part is too diffusive for me...too much
configuration and code to type for writing and using a DAO, and I really
don't understand the need of a new criteria API. Am I missing something?
Maybe it could be interesting for the presentation layer, but at present
I don't know...I'm still convinced the right way should be to simplify
the Java code the programmer need to write, without code generation or
custom tags (but other Parancoe developers are not of the same
opinion...so who knows... :) )
Have You any comment or suggestion about Parancoe and its development?
Or are You interesed to collaborate?
Kind regards,
Lucio
Dave Rapin ha scritto:
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Parancoe-users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to paranco...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to parancoe-user...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/parancoe-users?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
>
>
--
Lucio Benfante
JUG Padova http://www.parancoe.org ...have a look at it!
www.jugpadova.it
Dave Rapin
Well you've pretty much described what I like about Warp in your
response ;)
It would be fantastic if both persistence layers could combine or at
least mirror each other somehow, we'll see what Dhanjii thinks. I
think there would need to be both Spring and Guice DI implementations
though (Spring for wide audience and Guice for fun).
The webapp layers for Warp and Parancoe are definitely different, but
I'm mostly interested in the persistence layer at the moment and they
are quite a few similarities. I personally don't care too much about
the CRUD method naming, everyone seems to have their own preference.
Parancoe is further along with the abstraction, having both CRUD and
true dynamic finder methods is amazing (not even having to use named
queries). Whereas Warp is pretty simple from a configuration
perspective due to Guice DI. Both projects complement each other.
Here is the thread I posted on the warp board yesterday, which
describes what I think would be a very popular DAO layer:
http://groups.google.com/group/warp-core/browse_frm/thread/ff544fd7bfb3a9f
On Aug 17, 10:38 am, Lucio Benfante <lucio.benfa...@jugpadova.it>
wrote:
> --
> Lucio Benfante
> JUG Padova http://www.parancoe.org...have a look at it!www.jugpadova.it
>
> smime.p7s
> 4KDownload