Live data from Hacker News

The best Web Framework - what makes Lift different

seventhings.liftweb.net

1–10 of 79 posts

Re: The best Web Framework - what makes Lift different

#3
Just out of curiosity can you highlight the advantages lift has over other modern frameworks such as rails or django (and maybe some of the php frameworks). Most (or all) of the 7 things ship with rails 3. Stacking them up against one another might yield a better comparison.

Re: The best Web Framework - what makes Lift different

#4
Looks like it's great for building the things the authors thought you might want to build.

Just like every other "SuperMagic" framework, I suspect there's a lot of pain to be had once you step just a little outside of what it expects you to do with it.

We've all re-written Django inside of Django at least once, and thus have been burned by this sort of thing before. Personally, I think I'll wait to see some big projects written by people other than the framework designers before I agree that this is indeed the "best" web framework.

Re: The best Web Framework - what makes Lift different

#8

Meh... not too impressive. Parallel Rendering: why is this a big deal? Wiring is what ASP.NET has been doing for ages. I don't see the Wizard being more than a few lines of Clojure, and Seaside just completely blows it away.

"Wiring is what ASP.NET has been doing for ages" - which is pretty much why I thought it looked horrible!

[NB I rather like ASP.Net MVC but I use StringTemplate rather than ASPX pages for views].

Re: The best Web Framework - what makes Lift different

#10
post #3

Just out of curiosity can you highlight the advantages lift has over other modern frameworks such as rails or django (and maybe some of the php frameworks). Most (or all) of the 7 things ship with rails 3. Stacking them up against one another might yield a better comparison.

I think that the author is coming from the Java world, in which case the comparison he likely had in mind is not Rails or django, but the plethora of Java web frameworks.

Personally, for Java Web Frameworks there are two I like, for quite different reasons.

The first is Spring MVC. the rest of Spring can go die in a fire for all I care, but the Spring MVC part is quite nice. Used properly it allows you to very quickly write a 'low ceremony but high fidelity' server based system. If you make some simplifying assumptions you can have all the Ajax you want too.

The other is GWT. The authors continually harp on about saving us from Javascript inconsistencies and cross browser compatibility. And, to be honest, I think they have a very good point. Anyone who has done serious web work would have run into cross browser problems. There are some other benefits to GWT, such as moving client state down to the client, where it well and truly belongs. Also the ability to pass real, proper Java objects (or at least pretend that is what you're doing) means GWT would never even notice most of the 'heavy lifting' that other frameworks keep rupturing their disks over - such as parsing form parameters, or having to post forms to the server to get them validated only to have to go back to the client and recreate the failed form... (save yourself the round trip and a square headache).

Now, obviously I'm clueless, but to my untrained eye as a programmer the bits I'd need to put into a Lift app look similar in some respects to the JSP tag libraries. E.g. they are trying to get you to do the programming in the html or xml. The problem is that xml (or any of its bastard love-children) is absolutely awful for doing logic in, which makes it deeply unsuited for that task. The only JSP tag library that I remember being worth mucking around with was some sort of super-duper-table-thingy.

Oh sure, you might not need to use weird variants on tags like or or or whatever it was, but is moving the weirdness from the tag into the style/class really that big of an improvement? It is still doing the programming in the wrong place, that is, in the html.

Post reply on HN