Enable javascript in your browser for better experience. Need to know to enable it? Go here.
La información en esta página no se encuentra completamente disponible en tu idioma de preferencia. Muy pronto esperamos tenerla completamente disponible en otros idiomas. Para obtener información en tu idioma de preferencia, por favor descarga el PDF aquí.
Última actualización : May 05, 2015
NO EN LA EDICIÓN ACTUAL
Este blip no está en la edición actual del Radar. Si ha aparecido en una de las últimas ediciones, es probable que siga siendo relevante. Si es más antiguo, es posible que ya no sea relevante y que nuestra valoración sea diferente hoy en día. Desgraciadamente, no tenemos el ancho de banda necesario para revisar continuamente los anuncios de ediciones anteriores del Radar. Entender más
May 2015
Resistir ? Continuar con precaución

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 ? Continuar con precaución
Jul 2014
Resistir ? Continuar con precaución
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 ? Continuar con precaución
Publicado : Jan 28, 2014
Radar

Descargar Radar Tecnológico Volumen 26

 

English | Español | Português | 中文

Radar

Mantente informada sobre Tecnología

 

Suscríbete ahora

Visita nuestro archivo para leer los volúmenes anteriores