Los Techies - Latest Comments

Re: Observations on the Play! framework

Ashish — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:09:28 -0000

I am fairly new to Play, but seems very difficult to do DI. I am not able to get the confidence in doing TDD in Play

Re: Observations on the Play! framework

David Hesson — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 16:16:21 -0000

Has this changed much at all in Play? My suspicions after toying with Play 2.0 this morning were that testing was going to be annoying, especially isolation unit tests that I want to run fast, without services running. Seems like this post confirms my fears. I also see plenty of stack overflow posts mentioning that DI is unnecessary in Play but I think people forget that well laid out services/controllers rely on interfaces and class composition to perform work, which invites DI and makes it easier to unit test this code as well as configure your application.

Re: Observations on the Play! framework

Samario — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:52:52 -0000

Hello James,

Five years ago you shared this knowledge <<http: how-to-use-clientids-in-javascript-without-the-ugliness="" jagregory.com="" writings="">>, I don´t know how to implemented it, Can you please share a complete implementation, that is to say, a little visual studio project using the code. I will be gratefull for your help. Thansk. Henry.-

My email is : samario@gmail.com.</http:>

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

James Gregory — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:16:48 -0000

I like you.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Brad Smith — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:01:02 -0000

Ever thought about making FNH licensed? "Closer to my millions", eh? I mean don't rake us over the coals or anything, but fair compensation for a hard days work is acceptable by all means.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

tor — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:50:29 -0000

james, any word when the next fluent nhibernate gets released.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Myri — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:15:46 -0000

I finally managed to get something done with nhibernate, and it's all thanks to you, FNH and all the people in the community using it and helping out when running into issues...
So for that, I can only thank you! (and hope FNH will be here for the long haul!)

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Rafael — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:27:26 -0000

Good news... I really love fluent nhibernate, make our job much more easier.

Waiting for the next release... :)

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

James Gregory — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 02:04:48 -0000

Nope :)

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Rafael — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:44:36 -0000

So.... fluent nhibernate is dead?

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

BigFan — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 21:00:15 -0000

Hey Greg

When is FNH version 2.0 coming out?

bigFan

Re: Observations on the Play! framework

Royston Shufflebotham — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:08:20 -0000

I've always subscribed to the notion that a framework API shouldn't be considered as having 'survived contact with the enemy' until not only has somebody written something using your API, but that they have also written tests against their code.

I've just started getting into Play, having previously used ASP.NET MVC and Rails, and having spent the last few years doing constructor-based injection testing, it's bit of a disappointment testing-wise. Didn't they learn from the static unmockable HttpContent fiasco in ASP.NET? *sigh*

But maybe it's not a 'deal breaker' - can we make it work anyway?

Controller action methods are meant to be extremely lightweight, and generally you want to get out of those and into services, repositories, other (non-REST) 'controller' objects as quickly as possible. Those can all be developed using proper instances with constructor injection and all the usual good stuff, no?

Play introduces its own 'FunctionalTest' and 'UnitTest' base classes, but you don't have to use them: you can write your own (fast) plain JUnit tests as long as the code you're testing doesn't make heavy use of Play stuff, which is probably in the database level. But then you're straying out of unit tests and into more integration-y tests, perhaps? The biggest area of irritation there is all the static fields inherited from Controller, e.g. 'validation'.

I dunno. I like the feel of the framework (apart from the curious static methods everywhere) and so I _want_ it to work. But when I see the great work that's been going on in ASP.NET MVC, where they've made it really easy to use out-of-the-box yet have made everything completely pluggable and testable, Play seems a bit backward.

I'm going to give it a try and see if I can bend it to my DI+unit testing will. If not, I'm dumping it. But what's the alternative in Java land? :(

Re: Observations on the Play! framework

James Gregory — Sun, 25 Sep 2011 12:03:40 -0000

Hi Ryan, you are correct. I do actually do this, though re-reading what I wrote I can see how that's not very clear. My real complaint is that whilst you can run them in your IDE, they require the full web stack to be available before they'll execute; this basically means you get a minimum of a 5s overhead for running your tests. Five seconds doesn't sound like much, I admit, but it quickly gets frustrating when you're used to a fast cycle.

Like many things in Play, I can live with it, and I can appreciate their decisions; however, it would be nice to not *have* to do it their way. I get the feeling Play! is at the place where Rails was a few years ago.

Phase 1: "You WILL do it our way!"
Phase 2: "Ok, you SHOULD do it our way but you can deviate a bit"
Phase 3: "Our way is the default, do whatever the hell you want though."

Re: Observations on the Play! framework

rssvihla — Sun, 25 Sep 2011 11:21:53 -0000

It's been awhile since I've been in the Java space but I seem to remember being able to run tests through Intellij when using the play "idealize" command see the following link

http://www.playframework.org/d...

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Bhoomi Kakaiya — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:27:31 -0000

Is FNH with NHibernate 3.2 released?

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

James Gregory — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:21:13 -0000

haha, no worries. There's a build of FNH with NH3.2 in Github now. I'm working no updating Nuget as we speak.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Paul Speranza — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:13:02 -0000

I finally got around to looking at upgrading from NH 3.1 to NH 3.2 so naturally I looked to see if FNH supported it. After reading these comments I took a look at what is now built into NH 3.2 wondering how bad it could be. Are you kidding me?? What the hell is that? It is enough to scare anyone away from using NH. When I look at FNH, or Entity Framework and then this Conform thing I think if that is "sexy" then I'd rather be celibate.

Looks like I'll be waiting patiently for the new FNH to be released before I upgrade.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

row1 — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 04:43:58 -0000

I have just switched from FNH to NH 3.2 "Fluent". It feels incredibly clunky and complicated when compared to FNH.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Pascal Vanvlaenderen — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 04:21:16 -0000

Hey, Thanks for all your work on FluentNHibernate.
Your work was the key deciding factor on whether or not to use NHibernate in some of my projects.
For my NHibernate is a no go if I can't use FluentNHibernate.

The only problem I'm now facing is NuGet. I really love NuGet to manage my external references.
And now I need to use Nhibernate 3.2 (cause of some fixed bugs) and FluentNHibernate which references an older version.

Atm I'm fixed it by using assembly redirections, but I think others would also be very happy if you could just upgrade your package to use NHibernate 3.2 aswell. Then a lot of people can drop some references.

Thanks a lot already for your past work.

Kind regards,

Pascal Van Vlaenderen

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Kaidanov Gregory — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 03:21:31 -0000

I'm hopping that you won't stop developing the FNH - it's a very good tool ! I'm now building already second project using it to connect to Oracle. It's very important for people to know that you will not bail out - sort of speak - and enter FNH into a maintenance. The planning of the instuments used in a project also takes under advise a stability of the development and supporting team . The community is good , but the Father of the framework is better :)

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Alec Whittington — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:34:53 -0000

James
I have used FNH everyday since the initial version. Sure, it was rough when the API changed, but we fixed our mappings and moved on with little fuss. I could not imagine using NH without FNH again. FNH is the main reason new users find it easy to get started with NH when using S#arp Architecture and we have no plans on taking it out in favor of their API.

My vote would be for 2.0, pull out the pieces that can be leveraged from NH, concentrate on the rest.

Keep up the great work - it is appreciated by many users.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Phillip Haydon — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:27:09 -0000

Fluent NHibernate is the ONLY reason I picked up NH again. The new mapping in 3.2 looks terrible, in my opinion.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Matthew Florence — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:21:27 -0000

+1 for FNH 2.0. As someone just dipping my toe into OSS, I find this public self reflection very insightful. Thanks for all the hard work you've put in. Also, what do I know? But consider the possibility the FNH's user base could grow as a result of all this. People who've been slogging it out all these years may suddenly be introduced to a better way and find that FNH's fluent interface is more pleasurable to use than NH's.

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Asbjørn Ulsberg — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:40:26 -0000

I too just want to throw in my huge bag of support for FNH and the work you do, James. It's so highly appreciated I become nauseous thinking back to the ugly days of HBM XML or attribute decorations all over the place.

FNH is the perfect balance of "convention over configuration" that has made Rails so popular and is why I think FNH still has a prominent and important place after the release of NHibernate 3.2.

While the "loquacious" mapping of NHibernate in itself is nice, it doesn't replace FNH by any means. It's rather a new layer FNH can build upon to improve error handling (XSD validation errors isn't very intuitive; I blame NH on this btw) and decrease code size. Convention-based automapping is still the best way to configure an ORM and that's where I think FNH shines.

Please don't be disheartened by the turn of events, instead be inspired that NHibernate acknowledges the incredible work that has been done on FNH; I doubt this new "loquacious" mapping interface would even exist hadn't it been for FNH opening the door and showing the way. So please continue opening doors and showing the way. Release FNH 2.0 and set the record straight. Again. :-)

Re: Me on NHibernate 3.2

Fabio Maulo — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:03:39 -0000

If your are looking for the API you was asking not only to avoid XML abut even a little bit more controlled you can check NHibernate.Mapping.ByCode.Impl. If you need something more you please ping me (but don't cry after I give you what you have asked).