StackOverflow2013

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals

POPlay vs. Lift Pain Points
text
Body
copied!<p><strong>EDIT</strong><br> Slow compile times are now largely mitigated by <a href="http://www.playframework.com/documentation/2.1.1/SBTSubProjects" rel="nofollow">sub project</a> enabled builds, a huge win.</p> <p>Have switched away from Play's built-in asset generators (i.e. for Coffeescript and LESS) and moved over to 3rd party <a href="http://gruntjs.com/" rel="nofollow">Grunt JS</a>; now code changes during incremental builds are limited only by scalac compilation time and not also the overhead of Play's relatively slow assets generation.</p> <p><strong>ORIGINAL</strong><br> Overall pretty happy with Play 2.1 Scala (the 9/14/2012 release, just prior to switch to Scala 2.10); however, there are some development pain points:</p> <blockquote> <p>1) routing: on route change, one's entire route-controller structure <code>can</code> be re-compiled: not good.</p> <p>2) REST appears to not be directly supported since route <code>POST /foo/bar/:id</code> conflicts with <code>DELETE /foo/bar/:id</code>; i.e. route paths must be unique, presumably for reverse routing.</p> <p>3) views: with a scala.html file per foo action, the file count grows quickly, which means slower build times, more to compile; generics not supported and blind coding due to lack of IDE support (of course no scala template engine has IDE support to-date, AFAIK) are particularly tough areas.</p> <p>4) incremental builds work, but nothing in the process can be called "snappy", even a simple change to a scala.html file will in reality take @2 seconds, which is a long time when you're wanting that instant code-change browser-refresh feedback cycle.</p> </blockquote> <p>I know some of the above issues are being worked on by Play devs, and slow-ish build times are also directly related to sbt, scala version, and one's own code structure. Again, overall, Play has been an enjoyable development experience. This is about pain, however, and I want to know what Lift brings to the table in this regard...</p> <p>Lift seems to take a different approach. Do Lift-ers suffer from the above items? Assume not since MVC, Lift is not, and the xml-style snippets approach may not incur the same compile time hit that some of Play's behind the scenes build machinery does.</p> <p>What are the pain points in Lift?</p>

Querying!

Guidance

An individual column

Larger individual text columns get their own page to allow for proper reading.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload