Chris Seifert

Terence Parr wrote:
Unfortunately, I have bad tendinitis from writing software for 30 years. I began writing the book by first implementing a DSL that was extremely terse in order to reduce the keystrokes I needed to write the book. ... So, in summary, think DSL when you see or feel repeated pain

Thank you for taking the time for a well-thought out response - particularly with regards to mentioning your tendinitus driving your innovation. I'm starting to think of some pain points (corporate and project administrivia) as well as some fun early-stage stuff related to toy robots. That's pretty cool; Thank you for your time.

What sort of justification can a programmer provide to their company that a DSL is in order? What sort of problems cry out for a DSL? What would be some of the things that an average programmer would get out of spending time with your book? What should we try to use the book for?

Apologies for the simpleton question and this is not a flame, I'm just trying to figure out the practical benefits for an average programmer with an average job.

Although I've only used Prototype, I have heard good things about Dojo.

Why should I learn Dojo instead of Prototype? Are there specific types of applications that would benefit from using Dojo instead of Prototype.

To what extent does your book cover testing approaches, methods and tools within the IDE?


PS: Your other book, "Java EE 5 Development using Glassfish" was very helpful when I started using Glassfish.

Some xUnit books have argued for Outside-in testing where we we start by modeling tests (somehow) for the customer experience (i.e., integrated and behavioral tests). There are also some third party products, like ThoughtWorks' Selenium, that can help with Outside-in testing.

Does "Seam in Action" cover the best way to implement test driven development testing from the UI? Can Seam improve automated UI testing?

Is there anything new that Seam brings to the table to make TDD easier and more certain? Does your book cover it?

Originally posted by Jesus Angeles:


Did you watch the Olympics opening?

The countries paraded 'not' in a to z order, but in some chinese order. That is what Pat was saying if I am not wrong.

Unfortunately, I did not. I have 3 kids under the age of 4 and got rid of any sort of any sort of live TV. However, I recently read the collation section in Korpela's unicode book and wanted to continue my education in this area via some sort of feed(s). So, I thought I would ask. Thanks for your response.

Originally posted by David O'Meara:
Which part?

If this was in response to my question, I was interested in where the poster had heard about where the parade ordering had been done. I have an interest in unicode, linguistics and internationalization and am therefore interested in any good sites, groups or RSS feeds that might discuss issues related to those subjects. Should you happen know of any such places I would appreciate that information as well. I'm currently working through Korpela's "Unicode" book and am just starting to think about these issues.

Originally posted by Pat Farrell:


Which language do you base your alphabetical order?

And since Chinese is not an alphabetical language, how does one do that.

Hint: when the countries marched in the opening ceremony, they were ordered by the number of strokes in the idiograph that names the country.

Where did you hear about that? Do you subscribe to any interesting feeds to keep up on and further develop your understanding of these issues?

Thanks for the reference, that helps to explain why I'm having similar issues.

I'm somewhat new to EJB. Do you have any idea why the EJB standards seek to dictate database design by forcing the user to create 3 tables to model a One to Many relationship instead of the standard 2 with a foreign key to a primary key? In the past, I have used 3 tables only to model ManyToMany relationships.

BEGIN QUOTE

2.1.8.5.1 Unidirectional OneToMany Relationships
...
2.1.8.5.1 Unidirectional OneToMany Relationships
The following mapping defaults apply:
Entity A is mapped to a table named A.
Entity B is mapped to a table named B.
There is a join table that is named A_B (owner name first). This join table has two foreign key columns. One foreign key column refers to table A and has the same type as the primary key of table A. The name of this foreign key column is formed as the concatenation of the following:
the name of entity A; "_"; the name of the primary key column in table A. The other foreign
key column refers to table B and has the same type as the primary key of table B and there is a
unique key constraint on it. The name of this foreign key column is formed as the concatenation
of the following: the name of the relationship

ENDQUOTE