I'm starting to study Dart. It seems a nice language and in some aspects a real improvement over JavaScript. Since it claims to come with "batteries included" and to be meant for "structured web apps", though, I fail to understand how to actually structure a web app with it. Almost all the tutorials concentrate on language features, but Dart is quite simple and with many familiar bits, so that's the easy part.
Recently I fell in love with AngularJs. Now routing, two way binding, nested scope, clean separation of concerns... This actually means "structured" to me. But all the Dart examples I find are about selecting HTML elements and attaching listeners to them. This is old-style jQuery-like web programming and quite frankly the opposite of what I think of when I read "structured".
I don't want to compare a language and a framework and I know that Angular Dart is out, but I fear I'm missing something of vanilla Dart, because if it's all about a shorter syntax for lambdas, class based OOP vs prototypical OOP and the like, I don't see how it's supposed to be a game changer: there are many other languages that provide an alternative JS syntax (à la CoffeeScript) and compile to it, and they don't come at the price of losing a perfect integration with existing JavaScript libraries and tools.
Sure, it has optional static typing, which may be great, but this comes more to a matter of preferences. I'm a full time Python and Ruby developer and I'm perfectly fine with dynamic languages. Is this what they mean by "structured"?
Thanks for any clarification that will eventually come.
I work on AngularDart and have some experience structuring web apps.
When building a web app in Dart you would pick a web app framework, for example AngularDart or polymer.dart. Web app frameworks have a lot of opinion which is something that doesn't fit in the core libraries. In that respect, "vanilla Dart" is fairly vanilla.
Since I'm most familiar with Angular, I'll discuss the Angular + Dart combination. However, the rest of this post is also true for polymer.dart.
Angular provides a lot of structure to your app. We've been able to provide a similar structure for both Dart and Javascript. The concept of directives, data binding and dependency injection exist in both.
Dart provides more structure and we've been able to use that structure while building AngularDart. e.g. the directive API is defined in terms of annotations which means that IDEs understand them and can help you code.
There are a number of "structure" features in Dart. One of my favourites is tooling. With types and annotations comes better tooling support.
Types in Dart are most useful when combined with tools. Auto-complete is great but for large web projects, static analyze is even better. For example, in AngularDart, since directives are annotated classes, we can assert that the annotation is correct. Even more interesting is the potential to build tools. In AngularDart, we have a tool that extracts and analyzes all directives. This type of tooling is possible in Javascript but easy and supported by the language in Dart.
libraries, packages
integrated dependency management with pub package manager
class based instead of prototype based
scopes of variables as one would expect in a modern language
static syntax check
better tooling support like code completion
Related
In the expert system D3WEB, it is possible to insert\develop\use Ontology. However, I cannot get the point what's the purpose to introduce ontology in D3WEB?
The nice example on this page, https://www.d3web.de/Wiki.jsp?page=Demo%20-%20Ontology , shows how to develop an ontology in D3WEB. In my opinion, it can be more efficiently developed using Protégé. If the contents shall be changed with a real application, for instance, an ontology about 'dog', in the real application there could be instance dog A, B, C, D. It might be not feasible to 'insert' the instances into the D3WEB knowledge base. However, if the ontology changes over time, how to use the ontology in D3WEB then?
In my opinion, the best way is to develop an ontology outside of D3WEB using Java code. However, I believe the designer of D3WEB would have a nice reason to introduce ontology in D3WEB. I will appreciate it if someone let me know.
This is a somewhat common question we get regarding d3web-KnowWE, one reason might be, that our naming is somewhat misleading. So let me explain.
First there is d3web the java framework to run knowledge bases with strong problem solving knowledge, including rules, decision trees, flow-charts, covering lists, cost-benefit dialog strategies, time based reasoning, and so on. This framework in its core does not provide any GUIs, but is meant to integrate problem solving capabilities in other applications/expert systems. It also does not provide a way to properly create/author the knowledge bases it runs, aside maybe from doing it in the Java code on an API level.
To also provide proper means to author and develop a knowledge base, including some basic dialogs to run, demo, test, and debug the authored knowledge bases, we began working on the wiki system KnowWE, which today is basically a heavily extended JSPWiki. The page d3web.de itself for example is also just a build of KnowWE with specific content.
While we were working on and with KnowWE, we began to really like the approach to edit and author large knowledge bases in this 'wiki way', were you automatically support multiple distributed users to work on the same knowledge base, have automatic versioning, can add nice documentation directly beside the actual formal knowledge, can generate knowledge using script (because it's all just simple text markup), and so forth. Also, the underlying architecture of KnowWE became quite good and mature over the years.
So after some time of this, we found ourselves in the need to also author large ontologies. And yes, Protégé is a nice tool to develop ontologies, but for our use cases, it was just not well suited and we also found it to not scale very well. So we began to implement some simple markups to also allow to also develop ontologies in KnowWE. After then recognizing, that authoring ontologies the 'wiki way' indeed works pretty nicely, we decided to again also share these tools with everybody else on d3web.de. And that is why today you can author/develop both d3web knowledge bases and ontologies in KnowWE, although there is no actual connection/interoperability between both as of now. That would be nice of course and maybe we add this in the future, but for KnowWE is just a development environment for these two knowledge representation.
Maybe you can see KnowWE similar to an IDE like eclipse or IntelliJ, where the same application can be used to develop many different programming languages. KnowWE does the same for different knowledge representations.
A problem is maybe, that historically, we didn't differentiate very well between KnowWE and d3web, because KnowWE was narrowly used to build d3web knowledge bases. We also like to call KnowWE and its distribution package d3web-KnowWE for example. But maybe this should change...
Thanks for pointing this out, I will try to correct/clarify this on d3web.de
I'm trying to find a straightforward way to consume arbitrary iOS libraries from MonoTouch. At the moment, I need this calendar functionality, but the question applies to any such component.
I've read the Xamarin article on creating iOS bindings, but the process of building these bindings looks so complex (and tedious and likely error prone) that I think it would actually be easier for me to re-implement the given functionality in C# from scratch than it would to go through this process. Creating these bindings would require a deep dive into ObjectiveC, and I'm using Xamarin precisely so I don't have to do that.
As it stands, I am torn because I really want the ability to access some iOS libs, but don't have the time to master this process enough to create these bindings. Is there any other way to access these libraries?
(I wonder if there is or could be any sort of automated binding generator? It seems to me that 95% of the work is boilerplate translation of ObjectiveC headers to C# idioms, and an automated tool could do this, and then the final tweaking could be done by hand.)
You can:
Consume the ones that are already bound: you can find many on github, in particular in monotouch-bindings, and in the (just announced) Xamarin's Components Store;
Bind them yourself. That does require some Objective-C knowledge. Some tools/scripts exists but, in the end, the manual by hand editing is where the Objective-C knowledge is needed. There are general unit test (e.g. for Touch.Unit) that you can re-use that will dramatically reduce the number of bugs in them (blog post will be coming up soon to describe them in details).
Convert (or write from scratch) some into C# components;
Edit: Just to clarify, I didn't intend to suggest it might be impossible to write an IDE for dynamic languages. /edit
In my specific experience I'm thinking about years of conversations/comments about JavaScript, many of them on stack, but every now and then somebody says this, that the reason JS doesn't have a decent IDE is because dynamic types make it too hard to do.
I've thought about this in terms of writing a parser for JS and I don't understand where the types have anything to do with features like auto-complete or going straight to the definitions of stuff. If anything I would imagine scope and availability through passed params in a dynamic language would be considerably easier to establish without the type-checking concern. Especially in JS where the rules are actually pretty simple in most cases.
Until I started hearing people cite dynamic types as if it were a technical blocking issue, I just assumed that in most dynamic scripting languages you can run from a console, reduced verbosity and the ease of testing in a live execution environment makes debug easier, thereby reducing demand for IDEs.
So which is it? Something about static types that makes it easier to parse code for establishing scope/availability or am I right about reduced demand?
IDEs were invented in dynamic languages. Refactoring was invented in dynamic languages. Automated Refactoring Tools were invented in dynamic languages.
Dynamic languages had graphical IDEs with builtin support for pair programming over the network when static languages didn't even have graphics. Or IDEs. Or networking support.
Smalltalk and Lisp IDEs still are ahead of what's available for Java or C#, for example. In fact, Eclipse was a Smalltalk IDE once!
The quality of an IDE is dependent on how much effort is spent making it good. The Smalltalk and Lisp communities spent decades of research, dozens of PhDs and truckloads of money building powerful IDEs. So did the Java community. (Actually, they spent truckloads of money buying Smalltalk companies …)
The JavaScript community didn't. That's the whole difference.
There are some things that need a different approach between the two. Take something like IntelliSense / Content Assist / Autocompletion, for example. Statically trying to determine what identifiers are in scope in a dynamic language is basically equivalent to solving the Halting Problem, so you can't do that. Your IDE needs to be dynamic as well, then it doesn't need to do static analysis, it can just look at the running code and see what identifiers are in scope.
Smalltalk is a dynamic language and had one of the earliest graphic based IDEs including support for refactoring. Also look at Jetbrain's RubyMine for an example of a more modern IDE for a dynamic language.
It's not impossible. It's more difficult...but then again so is writing tools for developers in general.
I'm coming across references to 'Grails' and 'Groovy' quite often these days.. mostly on how great a productivity booster it is as opposed to standard Java EE, or things like JSF, Struts etc.. And there's also an impressive set of case studies in support of this on their web site too. So I just thought I would explore some of it..
As I start off on this, I was curious if there was any material (link, blog, article, paper..) that explains what are the special features in Grails+Groovy (and not found elsewhere, in the Java EE world) that makes it a more productive environment to work in?
The Wikipedia Grails page provides a basic explanation:
Grails has three properties which attempt to increase productivity when compared to traditional Java web frameworks:
No XML configuration
Ready-to-use development environment
Functionality available through mixins
The first point should really be "less configuration" as a result of RoR-popularized configuration-by-convention: the framework addresses development of a certain class of applications and provides sensible defaults in that context.
The second point is also valuable: a hello world application can be both developed and deployed in a couple of grails commands. This reduces the barrier to entry, increases mind-share and makes for a more streamlined development experience compared to pure Java development.
I'll use an example from the Grails GORM page to illustrate the 3rd point. Grails allows you to write this kind of code to retrieve a book by its title from the "book" table without having to set much of anything up:
Book.findByTitle("Groovy in Action")
Of course, it's the result of a much more general property of Groovy: its dynamic nature.
For more practical productivity increase reports, see e.g. the Sky report.
A framework becomes useful when it minimize effort to do something. That's why C became more successful than Assembly, C++ improved on C, and Java on C++.
Although not strictly listed in pro and cons, I like the discussion of the subject in a blogpost by one of the early Groovy developers. Furthermore, I also like the discussion on another modern database-backed-webapplication framework by Martin Fowler, one of the leading architects in the Java EE world.
I also came across Groovy first, while testing Java applications. You will come in touch with work of Dirk Koenig, e.g.short Groovy presentation.
By the way, if you want to develop "cloud" related applications, then Ruby opens up a bunch of doors as well.
What tools are available for metamodelling?
Especially for developing diagram editors, at the moment trying out Eclipse GMF
Wondering what other options are out there?
Any comparison available?
Your question is simply too broad for a single answer - due to many aspects.
First, meta-modelling is not a set term, but rather a very fuzzy thing, including modelling models of models and reaching out to terms like MDA.
Second, there are numerous options to developing diagram editors - going the Eclipse way is surely a nice option.
To get you at least started in the Eclipse department:
have a look at MOF, that is architecture for "meta-modelling" from the OMG (the guys, that maintain UML)
from there approach EMOF, a sub set which is supported by the Eclipse Modelling Framework in the incarnation of Ecore.
building something on top of GMF might be indeed a good idea, because that's the way existing diagram editors for the Eclipse platform take (e.g. Omondo's EclipseUML)
there are a lot of tools existing in the Eclipse environment, that can utilize Ecore - I simply hope, that GMF builts on top of Ecore itself.
Dia has an API for this - I was able to fairly trivially frig their UML editor into a basic ER modelling tool by changing the arrow styles. With a DB reversengineering tool I found in sourceforge (took the schema and spat out dia files) you could use this to document databases. While what I did was fairly trivial, the API was quite straightforward and it didn't take me that long to work out how to make the change.
If you're of a mind to try out Smalltalk There used to be a Smalltalk meta-case framework called DOME which does this sort of thing. If you download VisualWorks, DOME is one of the contributed packages.
GMF is a nice example. At the core of this sits EMF/Ecore, like computerkram sais. Ecore is also used for the base of Eclipse's UML2 . The prestige use case and proof of concept for GMF is certainly UML2 Tools.
Although generally a UML tool, I would look at StarUML. It supports additional modules beyond what are already built in. If it doesn't have what you need built in or as a module, I supposed you could make your own, but I don't know how difficult that is.
Meta-modeling is mostly done in Smalltalk.
You might want to take a look at MOOSE (http://moose.unibe.ch). There are a lot of tools being developed for program understanding. Most are Smalltalk based. There is also some java and c++ work.
Two of the most impressive tools are CodeCity and Mondrian. CodeCity can visualize code development over time, Mondrian provides scriptable visualization technology.
And of course there is the classic HotDraw, which is also available in java.
For web development there is also Magritte, providing meta-descriptions for Seaside.
I would strongly recommend you look into DSM (Domain Specific Modeling) as a general topic, meta-modeling is directly related. There are eclipse based tools like GMF that currently require java coding, but integrate nicely with other eclipse tools and UML. However there are two other classes out there.
MetaCase which I will call a pure DSM tool as it focuses on allowing a developer/modeler with out nearly as much coding create a usable graphical model. Additionally it can be easily deployed for others to use. GMF and Microsoft's Beta software factory/DSM tool fall into this category.
Pure Meta-modeling tools which are not intended for DSM tooling, code generation, and the like. I do not follow these tools as closely as I am interested in applications that generate tooling for SMEs, Domain Experts, and others to use and contribute value to an active project not modeling for models sake, or just documentation and theory.
If you want to learn more about number 1, the tooling applications for DSMs/Meta-modeling, then check out my post "DSMForum.org great resources, worth a look." or just navigate directly to the DSMForum.org
In case you are interested in something that is related to modelling and not generation of code, have a look at adoxx.org. As a metamodelling platform it does provide functionalities and mechanisms to quickly develop your own DSL and allows you to focus on the models needs (business requirements, conceptual level design/specification). There is an active community from academia and practice involved developing prototypical as well as commercial application based on the platform. Could be interesting ...