Gian -
I read the description of your book, and was wondering
whether it gives an indication of how one can migrate
from an implementation choice to another (more sophisticated)
one.
If you design the architecture correctly up front, it is fairly easy to move from a simple framework (ala
Struts) to a more complex one (like Tapestry). The comparisons I make between the frameworks assume the same basic elements that are critical to the application (namely, boundaries, entities, and business rules). The applications written with the frameworks use the same elements in almost every case. I talk a lot about proper design and architecture, and about the separation of responsibilities. I also show how to migrate a Model 2 application up to
EJB's with very few changes (in fact, with changes only to boundary classes).
Is it in your opinion possible to distill this information by
reading the cases in your book and compare each one of them
with a real life scenario?
I certainly hope so -- if not, I consider the book to be a failure. The applications I write in the book are meant to represent real applications, not toys. I don't dodge issues (such as database connectivity, client and server-side validations) because it's messy.
Neal Ford<br />Author, <i>Art of Java Web Development: Struts, Tapestry, Commons, Velocity, JUnit, Axis, Cocoon, InternetBeans, WebWork</i><br /><a href="http://www.nealford.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">www.nealford.com</a>