May
17
Which framework should I start with?
So over the weekend I started out checking out frameworks for ColdFusion. Out of all the blog posts, podcasts, and articles I could find I'm torn between ColdBox and Model-Glue.
I have been reading anything and everything on ColdBox and Model-Glue I could find. I have looked at the pros and cons of both but wanted to ask what you guys think?
13 Comments [add comment]
Learn both.
But first learn how to create your models in a right format with modern OOP techniques. Frameworks will only allow to organize your controller and views just in different flavors.
Tim - Sunday, May 17, 2009
But first learn how to create your models in a right format with modern OOP techniques. Frameworks will only allow to organize your controller and views just in different flavors.
Tim - Sunday, May 17, 2009
Even though it sounds like shameless
self promotion, I think you should give
cfwheels.org a spin. Even more if you
are a "novice" into frameworks. Wheels
will take good care of you. Give the
page a try and check out or
documentation to see how simple you
can get started, just a simple download,
doble click and you are up and running.
Site cfwheels.org
Docs http://code.google.com/p/cfwheels/w/ list
Raul Riera - Sunday, May 17, 2009
Site cfwheels.org
Docs http://code.google.com/p/cfwheels/w/ list
Raul Riera - Sunday, May 17, 2009
I'm biased too... the onTap framework. :) But I agree with Tim that knowing how to write a business model that's fully independent of your framework choice is a good first step. When I converted Ray's Galleon Forums to 5-6 different frameworks (Mach-II, Model-Glue, 2 versions of FuseBox, ColdBox and the onTap Framework), Ray's model from the original worked out pretty well -- so I never had to edit any of his CFCs, irrespective of which framework I was plugging it into. My writeup is here: http://www.tapogee.com/galleonproject/ and there was a cfmeetup presentation here: https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a204547676/p54833624/ although I wasn't able to cover as much in that preso as in the writeup
ike - Monday, May 18, 2009
ike - Monday, May 18, 2009
I found Fusebox 5.5 no xml by the far easiest route into ColdFusion MVC frameworks.
brian - Monday, May 18, 2009
brian - Monday, May 18, 2009
Coldbox is a complete development platform, MVC is small part of platorm. Just view this images, surely none else match this.
http://www.coldboxframework.com/includes/imagelibrary/ColdBoxPlatform.png
Sana - Monday, May 18, 2009
http://www.coldboxframework.com/includes/imagelibrary/ColdBoxPlatform.png
Sana - Monday, May 18, 2009
I agree with Tim. What is more important is knowing how to design your model. If done correctly, you can just drop your model into any framework without altering your original code.
Scott Stroz - Monday, May 18, 2009
Scott Stroz - Monday, May 18, 2009
@sana - actually most of what's described in that graphic is also included in the onTap framework, I suspect that's also true of CFWheels (although I haven't gotten to adding it to the Galleon Project, so my understanding of it is limited), and several of the additional items outside of MVC are even included in the other MVC frameworks, I know for example that there are extra debugging features in Fusebox, et al.
ike - Monday, May 18, 2009
ike - Monday, May 18, 2009
I used Fusebox for a long time (vs3, 4,
5, and 5.5) and think it's a solid
framework. Recently I've switched to
ColdBox because I like its approach as a
framework/development platform. I
prefer convention over configuration
and I like that ColdBox is easily usable
in a 'typical' web environment and as a
back-end for Flex/Ajax RIAs.
Craig Kaminsky - Monday, May 18, 2009
Craig Kaminsky - Monday, May 18, 2009
I just started getting into the frameworks myself, and I decided to go with Mach-II. Coming from a background where I pretty much had zero framework experience, I found it super easy to get up and running with Mach-II (http://www.cfgears.com/index.cfm/2009/4/15/A-beginners-look-at-MachII-Part-I--Learning-MachII-in-less-than-an-hour).
That's not to say there's anything wrong with any of the other frameworks. I'm planning on giving them all a whirl, I just had to start somewhere and Mach-II wound up being it. ;)
Eric Cobb - Monday, May 18, 2009
That's not to say there's anything wrong with any of the other frameworks. I'm planning on giving them all a whirl, I just had to start somewhere and Mach-II wound up being it. ;)
Eric Cobb - Monday, May 18, 2009
Thanks for all the feed back.
I'm going to download both and
CFWheel and install all three.
I think once I go through the
"My first app" on all three I
will pick which one I'll start
with first. I do plan on
learning them all though.
John Ramon - Monday, May 18, 2009
John Ramon - Monday, May 18, 2009
Try them all. Pick the one that "thinks like you".
I am a ColdBox fan. Such a fan, I just made my first contribution with the ScriptInclude Plug-in now featured in the code depot.
I selected ColdBox because of the documentation and momentum of the framework. My thick skull needed the documentation and the momentum made me feel better about investing my projects and time into the framework.
More importantly, if you design your models correctly, you should be able to build the same app on multiple frameworks with minimal work and see how you like all of them.
Aaron Greenlee - Monday, May 25, 2009
I am a ColdBox fan. Such a fan, I just made my first contribution with the ScriptInclude Plug-in now featured in the code depot.
I selected ColdBox because of the documentation and momentum of the framework. My thick skull needed the documentation and the momentum made me feel better about investing my projects and time into the framework.
More importantly, if you design your models correctly, you should be able to build the same app on multiple frameworks with minimal work and see how you like all of them.
Aaron Greenlee - Monday, May 25, 2009
I have been a MG lover since v1. Its a
GREAT front controller framework.
GREAT.
But... I put MG down a month ago and started to mess with FW/1 available at http://fw1.riaforge.org/ and I will have to say I can’t/won’t go back.
FW/1 offers the simplest, and I’d say the least cumbersome way to implement a front controller. It is thin, it is pure, and it is just plain... perfect.
What’s my reason? I found that the ModelGlue.xml, while AWESOME, was just a little to much. I really really liked the Implicit Invocation pattern at first but haven’t found a reason to keep that pattern in a front controller. There are two many ways to skin the cat which Implicit Invocation helps deal with. FW/1 keeps it simple and doesn't impose the concept on you.
FW/1 offers the two important methods, IMHO, that web apps need in the controller layer, populate() (although not that important) and a statefull redirect(). It also has a couple of other features such as before() and after() methods for each controller which help solve most situations I have found where Implicit Invocation was a cool thing to have.
Its spin up time is negligible and integrating a IOC framework of ANY kind is just dumb simple.
It was developed by Sean Corfield who has worked on, or with most ColdFusion MVC frameworks (I believe thats a true statement) and it seems to me that he hit a grand slam with this new front controller. I seems to me that it is a framework made by a very experienced developer who wanted the best that ColdBox, FB, MG, and Mach-II had to offer with out any of the extras. Thanks Sean.
So plus one for FW/1.
John Allen - Thursday, August 13, 2009
But... I put MG down a month ago and started to mess with FW/1 available at http://fw1.riaforge.org/ and I will have to say I can’t/won’t go back.
FW/1 offers the simplest, and I’d say the least cumbersome way to implement a front controller. It is thin, it is pure, and it is just plain... perfect.
What’s my reason? I found that the ModelGlue.xml, while AWESOME, was just a little to much. I really really liked the Implicit Invocation pattern at first but haven’t found a reason to keep that pattern in a front controller. There are two many ways to skin the cat which Implicit Invocation helps deal with. FW/1 keeps it simple and doesn't impose the concept on you.
FW/1 offers the two important methods, IMHO, that web apps need in the controller layer, populate() (although not that important) and a statefull redirect(). It also has a couple of other features such as before() and after() methods for each controller which help solve most situations I have found where Implicit Invocation was a cool thing to have.
Its spin up time is negligible and integrating a IOC framework of ANY kind is just dumb simple.
It was developed by Sean Corfield who has worked on, or with most ColdFusion MVC frameworks (I believe thats a true statement) and it seems to me that he hit a grand slam with this new front controller. I seems to me that it is a framework made by a very experienced developer who wanted the best that ColdBox, FB, MG, and Mach-II had to offer with out any of the extras. Thanks Sean.
So plus one for FW/1.
John Allen - Thursday, August 13, 2009
