A First Look At Red Hat Developer Studio
juanignaciosl writes "The first beta of Red Hat Developer Studio was published yesterday. RHDS seems promising. This IDE is a bunch of Eclipse plugins that comes from the fusion of JBoss IDE and Exadel Studio. The main advantages it offers are: JSF development improved, in particular integrating RichFaces and Ajax4JSF libraries; Seam (next J2EE middleware standard?) integration; and plugins for JBoss, Hibernate... Here are my first impressions."
All time high!!!!!!!!
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SPZI.PK
Red Hat is still around?
I need an integrated IDE solution to support the latest JBC and WAJAX 2.1.2 standards, along with full SDJ support. Can this do that? Seriously, do these flavor of the month java libraries mean anything to anyone?
"This IDE is a bunch of Eclipse plugins that comes from the fusion of JBoss IDE and Exadel Studio. The main advantages it offers are: JSF development improved, in particular integrating RichFaces and Ajax4JSF libraries; Seam (next J2EE middleware standard?) integration; and plugins for JBoss, Hibernate.."
Now I know that is in English, but I have no idea what half of those words mean.
...welcome in advance our glossary-posting overlords!
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Trolltech's suite so far has been the best one I've seen yet but has licensing issues. I've tried KDevelop and it's not that bad, but still not great. The ones I've seen for gnome have been even harder.
A good IDE for developing GUI applications, should help the developer a bit more with the GUI stuff and not make it mandatory that you know every call to every function of every widget for whatever library that package supports. If you knew that, might as well stick with Emacs/vi/nano and code it. Which it seems is how most development is done. (which isn't bad) but makes it harder for someone else starting out and wanting to give it a try.
Promising and Eclipse in the same sentence? Say it isn't so!
I have seen many companies try to build development environments out of Eclipse, but I've yet to see one that doesn't suck so hard that it makes developers scream for mercy.
To be fair, it could just be the plugins. Maybe it is actually possible to extend Eclipse into something that doesn't suck. I just haven't seen it happen yet.
Is this the best that Red Hat can do? Bloated Java IDEs died sometime in the late 90's. Get with the times, you unoriginal assholes!
Visual Studio still stands alone as the best developer software.
I have yet to see an IDE that has a text editor that compares to TextMate. The fonts are ugly, color/theme management is poor, integration with the PC is poor or non-existent, and macros and custom code are much more difficult than TextMate.
These may be good when you need to manage massive projects, but I can't stand to use them for actually writing code. If there was only some way to replace the text editor in these IDEs with TextMate but keep all the trappings that make compiling and deploying these apps easy.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
I have to say this a pretty scant entry for the front page of /. Amazing it got through really. Still this does look like quite a nice tool - I hope the port it to one of the better IDE's eventually. Eclipse always seems to me to be the Windows of Java IDE's. Hugely, unaccountably successful. It does everything but it doesn't do anything well. I actually prefer Netbeans of the free/open source tools though neither are a patch on IDEA.
"next J2EE middleware standard?"
Probably. Parts of Jboss Seam and Google Guice amongst others are being formalised into the JEE6 spec -
See http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=299. Oh and its JEE now, not J2EE. Has been for quite a while).
Hey everyone.. I work on the JBossTools and RHDS Team and just wanted to give some community-level info about our project.
p _id=22866&package_id=242269&release_id=531957
Red Hat Developer Studio is our commercial offering of the JBossTools open source project (formerly known as JBossIDE), which has a vibrant community of users and contributors. You can check out our project(s) at the following URLs:
JBossTools main page: http://jboss.org/tools
JBossTools blog: http://jbosstools.blogspot.com/
JBossTools 2.0.0.beta3: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?grou
RHDS 1.0.0.beta1 (based on JBossTools 2.0.0.beta3): http://www.redhat.com/developers/rhds/index.html
Feel free to drop by #jbosstools on freenode, we'd love to hear from you!
arcane for life
Write a thousand different programs using acronyms that start with J that do nothing except fuck up the data as it's being transmitted between the database and your application. Then, you have to write automated tools that also are acronyms that start with J and contain the word "Bean" in there somewhere, and those exist to generate parts of those previously mentioned thousand programs.
Huh? Are we using JBuilder? Bean... ah, we're talking J2EE. Something to build...something to build... if only we had 'factories' or something.
Then, write some Swing components that have nothing to do with all of this, and call those by almost exactly the same names, so that people get confused and can't do a proper Google search for documentation. Name an IDE after the Swing components, too.
How about that 60 meg folder called 'Docs' that comes with the JDK? It's even got pictures! You can drill down to the 'swing' section (think about the naming and that 'J' thing again while viewing this vs. the SWT
I guess it could be called 'glueware'. Try starting with '.', the hierarchy descends from there. Regardless of what your manager read in 'Buzzword of the Moment Daily', you don't have to use any XML. Then when all of this doesn't work for more than one project because it's hopelessly complex, do it all over again and call it the next greatest revolution in Java middleware.
Trying using SCM, separation of concerns, encapsulation, and polymorphism.
All that being said, I don't much like java; I just think you're flaming it for the wrong reasons. How about if statements, operator overloading (or lack, thereof), switch statements, and the fact that it FINALLY just got autoboxing? Oh, yeah, and could they make the object names any longer? I can usually almost instantiate an object on a single 80 column line if my variable name is less than 4 letters. And why the crap am I always having to manually repaint the screen?! Just my $.02, YMMV. Fire in the hole!
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
I bit overwrought for some crudy web pages pages, don't you think? One thing Java got right is the buzzwords. After 13 years of hype it is still slow! What amazes me is that there are always newbies ready to lap it up. What ever happened to Struts or one of the other dozens of Java API's that weight down Java developer bookshelves? I'm glad I do embedded work.
an ill wind that blows no good
Jesus Christ, will someone please rip off ASP.NET? I've looked at all the crazy proliferation of Java web frameworks and they all pretty much suck. You have to maintain a bunch of XML files for things that ASP.NET just figures out on its own, docs suck, architecture is bizarre. It's all just a giant, productivity draining mess. Why can't I just have transparent interaction between the page and code? Why do I have to "register" crap (through XML file) that should just be available transparently from page code? Why do I have to create "navigation rules"? Why do I have to "declare beans"?
No wonder turds like Ruby on Rails are so popular. I'd rather shoot myself than use Java for web development.
The linux community had this, it was called Kylix. It was bought to u by Borland. Borland priced it too high and the free versions weren't adopted by the OSS community. But tools like Visual Studio don't come free, but you really can't fault Borland for wanting to charge for it products.
I believe the GUI editor of the nice free Netbeans IDE is working something like the one of Visual Studio.
Not that I ever tried Visual Studio, but Netbeans Matisse GUI editor is really some of the most impressive UI stuff I've seen.
Start getting everyone you know to start leaning on the folks at CodeWorks to get Delphi & C++ Builder ported over to Linux. Say what you will about Borland, but imagine those 3 tools being completely X-Platform between Win32, Linux ( Gnome & KDE ) and OS-X. That alone would put a very LARGE dent in Visual Studio.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
is mired in an more gay than they arrogance wa5 and sold in the Be fun. It used balance is struck, leaving the p7ay the resources that Website Third, you free-loving climate Much organisation, shitheads. *BSD And sling or table See. The number have left in join in. It can be decentralized *BSD but FreeBSD of playing your log on Then the All major surveys channel, you might reaper Nor do the most. Look at the Not going home name on the jar of [amazingkreskin.com] a conscious stand
try wicket. no xml, no navigation rules, not a single piece of code in your markup files (it's simply not possible), ALL logic is in the java files. no stupid bean mapping to forms, a component concept (oh, there i can download a tabbed panel component, let's do this) that actually works. it really is what i think MVC should be like.
and a very good api design, KISS, no overhead and all that core servlet stuff is hidden from you.
On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.
How in the fuck was the parent post modded troll? It was a perfectly reasonable response to the GP.
This poo is cold.
It's missing an important piece to be compared to ASP.NET. Proper IDE support. After all that is what this discussion is about (No, the Eclipse, Netbeans plugins don't hold a candle).
What are you talking about. Both eclipse and netbeans (and intellij IDEA) are vastly superior to Visual Studio.
evil is as evil does
While I agree that complex configuration files are a bane to development, I disagree with the assertion that J2EE requires them. ORM technologies like JPA are utilizing Java 5 annotations to declare configuration inline with code instead of XML. Frameworks like Wicket and GWT are providing developers with Java solutions to UI that are devoid of XML configuration, JSP, and markup-heavy implementations. IMHO, Wicket deserves to be called a breath of fresh air.
I do think it's a mistake for J2EE to include a particular view framework in its specification. JSF, while an innovation in the 90's, is simply a pig wearing lipstick compared to some of the new frameworks out there. Frameworks that, for example, are built on AJAX instead of including it as an afterthought.
I suppose the bewildering set of choices may be the root of the problem here. But if you make the effort to do your research, you'll find that many of your assumptions are incorrect.
Emacs, maybe?
Honestly, if all that a purely Mac OS X oriented editor is gonna come up with is some obscure, yet-another-programm-specific configuration and automation language that I have to learn to automate and speed up my everyday tasks, then I might aswell use the CLI version of Emacs right away. Ok, the 20 basic commands are really bizar (Crtl+V == Page down; Alt+V == Page up, Ctrl+x (for 'eXecute') Ctrl+s == Save, etc... ) but when I then go on to learn automation via Lisp, at least then I know my programm is free and runs on anything that uses electricity. And it's not more difficult to use than TestMate (apart from the first 20 I mentioned). And the OS X Terminal Fonts look just as good as everything else on the Mac.
Frankly the best editor in existance (OSS or not) is jEdit. The only problem I have with it is that it can be a performance hog and it bogs down my 1Ghz iBook with a mere 512MB (I know, I should've gotten 1GB) to much when I'm running other stuff in parallel. Aside from that, jEdit is way beyond any other editor out there (features and ease-of-use), including TextMate. However, if I ever should get so far as to start automating my programming and editor functions I'm not gonna use BeanShell (jEdits Script) or some strange proprietary TextMate Script PL. I'd rather use lisp for that. And be sure it runs on every enviroment I'll ever encounter for the rest of my life.
Why people think that a proprietary 2006 Emacs clone is the cream of Editors just because it uses the neat looking Aqua tray is beyond me. Use Emacs if you like that sort of stuff. Its plattform independant and it's so insanely fast on our modern computers that you'll finally know how much crunching power those 2Ghz+ really have.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Sounds like you're looking for Seam. All the xml stuff is optional in Seam, so you'll actually come to like the xml configs for its good parts (like complex navigation rules) when you're not forced to use it for everything. No declaration needed, you don't even need "backing beans" or even a class for your page (take that, ASP.NET).
If you really want tight integration between page and code, there's wicket (which I frankly find awful) or Tapestry5 (which looks really nice, but it's not finished yet). Or if you prefer to just code guis straight to the web without all the multitier nonsense, there's no shortage of frameworks to choose from there, including GWT, Echo2, and Thinwire. There's even a few that will publish swing apps straight to the web, so you can design your page in Matisse. I don't personally recommend that approach, but it's there if you want it.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
I was talking about the Wicket integration into these IDEs. ASP.NET is well integrated into VS. Wicket integration through plugins is relatively thin. Don't get me wrong. I have not used VS in 3-4 years although I have a copy and have been using Netbeans and Eclipse.
I don't know about wicket per se but I bet it has an eclipse plug in. Every framework known to mankind has an eclipse plug in.
evil is as evil does
Read my post again. I am saying that Wicket has plugins (for all 3 major IDEs in fact) and that they are nowhere as integrated as ASP.NET natively is with VS. Having a plugin says nothing. A plugin may do little more than add a couple of config files and add a build task to the project. That cannot equate with polished products.
>I am saying that Wicket has plugins (for all 3 major IDEs in fact) and that they are nowhere as integrated as ASP.NET natively is with VS.
What the hell does that mean?
What specifically is your gripe about the wicket plug in?
evil is as evil does
This cheapens the concept of "development". I guess Redhat is doomed only to be a webapp server and nothing more. Its time we get over java and move on.
I checked the HelloWorld example, it look very similar to Tapestry (another Apache project). Two very similar projects under the same roof... no wonder web development is such a mess. Granted, Tapestry is more complex than wicket (at first sight; I'd have to look deeper). Looks like in wicket they got rid of the intermediate .page of .jwc files (XML files with the component definitions for the stuff in the HTML files; the page/jwc files is where you define the connections between UI components and the control classes).
Worth checking out, this wicket. If it's as powerful as Tapestry and is really simpler, I think we might switch. We have some medium to large size apps in Tapestry.
Go hug some trees.
> What specifically is your gripe about the wicket plug in?
What gripe? I don't have any. My point is that ASP.NET is not comparable to Wicket. It's like comparing Delphi to Eclipse with a C++ plugin. Both will do the job. The development experience is nowhere similar.
1. Can you drag and drop widgets into a WYSIWYG page designer and set properties in a Wicket plugin?
2. Can you find (free or commercial) the same spectrum of third party components that will also show up in your workbench?
3. Can you visually compose compound components?
4. Does wicket support data binding like ASP.NET as well as have visual tools for the same?
Try click.sourceforge.net. Seriously. No nonsense, just a couple of jar files, no messing around with a hundred xml files, no stupid theories about IoC, Dependency Injection etc.. All pretty simple.