Web Frameworks

Together. Free your energies
Together. Free your
energies

Web Frameworks

Nicolas Bonamy
Cliquez pour modifier le style des sous-titres du masque
Alexandre Muzet
Samuel Massot

TS, Web 2.0
Together. Free your energies Nicolas Bonamy
© 2008 Capgemini. All rights reserved

Agenda

• Introduction
• Framework requirements
• Existing frameworks

TS, Web 2.0

Web 2.0

Technical
challenge!

TS, Web 2.0

Framework (FW)

Facilitate software development by
allowing designers and programmers
to spend more time on meeting
software requirements rather than
dealing with the more standard low-
level details of providing a working
system.

TS, Web 2.0

FW’s B’s & C’s

• Benefits
 Provides ready-to-use services to the development team
 Promotes a standard way of doing things
 New developers can get onboard more easily
• Concerns
 Reduces freedom
 Steep learning curve depending on the complexity of the FW
 Should evolve as fast as the technology
• A good FW is a loosely coupled one where a component can easily be
replaced by another one providing the same service
• Dependency injection

TS, Web 2.0

Agenda

• Introduction
• Framework requirements
 MVC
 ORM
 REST
 Ajax
 …
• Existing frameworks

TS, Web 2.0

Requirements

• Model-View-Controller (MVC) • Pluggable architecture
• Object-Relational Mapping • i18n and L10n support
(ORM) • Security
• Web Service support, REST • Steady performance
• Intuitive URLs (Routing) • Unit and non-regression testing
• Scaffolding (in model) • Agile development:
• Templating system (in views) KISS, CoC, DRY
• Ajax integration • Good documentation
• W3C Standards compliance • Active community

TS, Web 2.0

Integrated vs. Custom

Integrated Framework “Custom” Framework

SOAP
MVC ORM
ORM

SOAP Ajax MVC

TS, Web 2.0

MVC
• Architectural pattern that:
 Isolates business logic from user interface
 Enables TDD

Model
Manages application state
Exposes application functionality

View Controller
Renders the model Defines application behavior
Collects user inputs Maps user inputs to model updates

TS, Web 2.0

HMVC

Model

Controller
M

V C

M

V C

TS, Web 2.0

ORM

• Mapping from data stored in relational databases to
objects (as in OOP)
• Often a separated library integrated in a framework
SELECT * FROM user WHERE id=1

UPDATE user SET firstname='Nicolas' WHERE id=1

DELETE FROM user WHERE id=1

User user = GetItem(1);
user.Firstname = quot;Nicolasquot;;
SaveItem(user);
DeleteItem(user);

TS, Web 2.0

ORM – Features and Benefits

• Features
 RDBMS independence through adapters
 Proprietary object-oriented query language (HQL, DQL…)
 Object caching (more or less advanced)
• Benefits
 Much less code to write
 Easy to work with relations (one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-
one and many-to-many)
 Really, MUCH LESS code to write

TS, Web 2.0

ORM – Concerns and solutions

• Concerns
 Learning curve
 Hit on performance (constructing trees of objects can be very
expensive in terms of CPU and I/O)
 Hides SQL requests and hardens the optimization task
• Solutions
 Lazy-loading of related objects
 “Projections” allow to retrieve only selected parts of objects
 Raw SQL and stored procedure calling have been implemented
on most ORMs
 Only load objects when you need objects
TS, Web 2.0

Web service support

• Standards compliance:
 XML-RPC
 SOAP
 WSDL
 WS-*
• Code generation based on WSDL
• Automatic WSDL generation

TS, Web 2.0

REST

• REpresentational State Transfer
• Architecture style, not a standard
• Applies to web applications and web service
• Use of all HTTP verbs: GET, POST, PUT, DELETE
• URIs are meaningful and self sufficient
• Responses contain information to transfer to another
state (URIs of other resources):
 http://www.acme.com/parts/list returns a list of parts with the
URI for each part

TS, Web 2.0

Intuitive URLs (routing, permalink)

http://www.myblog.com/post.php?id=123456

“URLs as part of the interface”

http://www.myblog.com/activity-breadown.html

• Rules for automatic matching and helpers to generate
user-friendly URLs easily
 /controller/action/params

TS, Web 2.0

REST vs WS-*

• REST is a “lightweight” web service architecture
 Not asynchronous
 No transactions
 No security profiles
• REST being enhanced to support more complex scenarios
 Will probably get as tedious as WS-*

TS, Web 2.0

Scaffolding

• Automatic generation of all the code needed to perform
basic CRUD operations on entities
 Model (SQL or ORM requests)
• Can be extended to generate
 View (automatically generated pages and forms)
 Controller (basic link between Model and View)
• Useful for back-office part of a solution
• Can be used as a starting point for the front-office but
will generally require lot of rework

TS, Web 2.0

Templating system

• Reusable pieces of codes to generate user interface
elements
• Better separation between design code and logic code
• Allows designer to easily work on HTML and CSS code
• Ensures consistency of appearance

TS, Web 2.0

Ajax Integration

• Asynchronous JavaScript and XML
 XMLHttpRequest, XML, JSON
 HTML, CSS, DOM and JavaScript
• Requirements
 Helpers to generate Ajax code
 Methods to serialize (list of) objects to XML or JSON
 Compatible with popular Ajax frameworks

TS, Web 2.0

Ajax Frameworks

• Cross-browser XMLHttpRequest encapsulation
• DOM features
 Selecting and traversing
 Create, insert, remove
 Attributes manipulation
 Events handling
 CSS Styling
• Widgets: window, dialog, tabs, carousel, accordion…
• Interactions: drag’n’drop, sorting…
• Effects and animations
TS, Web 2.0

Pluggable architecture

• Not all needs can be covered by the framework
• Leverage users community and open-source
development
• Example of plug-ins that can be found
 Authentication system
 Full-featured file upload module
 Charts integration

TS, Web 2.0

i18N and L10n

• UTF-8 support at all levels
 Database
 MVC framework
 XHTML
 Ajax
• Hand-made or supports standards
 gettext
 XLIFF (XML Localization Interchange File Format)

TS, Web 2.0

Security

TS, Web 2.0

Performance

Performance

Features

TS, Web 2.0

Caching

• Browser caching (HTTP)
 Expires, Last-modified, Cache-Control
 Etag
• Response caching
 Full pages
 Fragments
• Database caching
 Parsed queries
 Results sets

TS, Web 2.0

Ruby on Rails (Rails, RoR)
• Built over the Ruby language
• First framework really built for Web 2.0
development
• Pushed the envelope of what a Web 2.0
development framework should be
• ORM: ActiveRecord (reused pattern)
• AJAX: prototype
• RESTful
• Agile

TS, Web 2.0

• Reference MVC Framework
• Released February 2007
• Struts 2 is the fusion of Struts 1 and Webwork
• Struts 2 actions are POJO
• Ajax taglibs Integration and widget customization
• Interceptors stack over HTTP request for pre/post
treatments

TS, Web 2.0

• Reference lightweight development container
• Layer separation (used in all layers)
• Enables POJO programming
• Transaction management
• Object lifeCycle management (dependency injection)
• Common frameworks integration (Hibernate, Struts)
• Very active community

TS, Web 2.0

• Reference ORM Framework
• Database independence
• POJO Programming
• Automated database model generation
• Advanced cache management

TS, Web 2.0

• Has recently entered the MVC/ORM framework world
• Use of PHP framework requires setup of a PHP code
cache mechanism (APC, eAccelerator…)
• Frameworks
 Zend  CakePHP
 Symfony  CodeIgniter
• ORM
 Propel
 Doctrine
 ADOdb
TS, Web 2.0

• Zend: main commercial actor of PHP world
• PHP5 only (PHP4 object model too weak)
• Usage is “open source” but not contribution
• Very loosely coupled framework: “Use-at-will”
• Own ORM: “Table gateway”
• XLIFF based i18n and L10n
• Integrated in Zend Studio IDE
• Numerous references (M6, Nokia…)

TS, Web 2.0

• Initially built and now sponsored by Sensio Labs
• PHP5 only (PHP4 object model too weak)
• Open source framework (MIT license)
• Loosely coupled architecture (going forward):
 Easy ORM switch (Propel or Doctrine)
 Easy JavaScript toolkit switch (1.2)
• XLIFF based i18n and L10n
• References
 Yahoo! Answers (130M users), Yahoo! Bookmarks (20M users)
 Dailymotion
TS, Web 2.0

• .NET is not a framework !
• ASP.NET is a framework
 Not MVC compliant
 Very hard to test ASPX pages
 No scaffolding
 No ORM equivalent technology
• ADO.NET’s DataSet
• LINQ (query language)

TS, Web 2.0

Data access

• Microsoft Entity Framework
 Available since .NET 3.5 SP1
 Real ORM ?
• NHibernate
 .NET port of Java Hibernate
 Lagging behind but still very functional
 LINQ support
• Subsonic
 developer hired by Microsoft

TS, Web 2.0

Solutions

• Castle Project
 Inspired by RoR
 MVC Framework : MonoRail
• Supports routing
• AJAX via prototype
 ORM : ActiveRecord built on top of NHibernate
 Aspect oriented programming and Inversion of Control
• ASP.NET MVC Framework
 Microsoft stuff, beta stage
 ASP.NET AJAX
 Routing
TS, Web 2.0

Tentative framework

• ASP.NET MVC
• NHibernate, optionally coupled with
 Castle ActiveRecord: use .NET’s [Attributes] instead of XML
mapping files
• ASP.NET Ajax
 Official integration of jQuery announced recently
• Industrialization
 Visual Studio Team System 2010

TS, Web 2.0

References
Resource URL
MVC, ORM, SOAP, REST… http://en.wikipedia.org
Struts2 http://struts.apache.org/
Spring Framework http://www.springframework.org/
ASP.NET MVC http://www.asp.net/mvc/, http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/
Hibernate, NHibernate http://www.hibernate.org, http://www.hibernate.org/343.html
Livre blanc sur les frameworks PHP http://tinyurl.com/php-frameworks
Zend Framework http://framework.zend.com/
Symfony http://www.symfony-project.org

TS, Web 2.0

Web Frameworks

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (7)

Destaque

Destaque (16)

Semelhante a Web Frameworks

Semelhante a Web Frameworks (20)

Último

Último (20)

Web Frameworks