Play Framework 1.0和2.0之间的主要区别是什么? [英] What are the major differences between Play Framework 1.0 and 2.0?
问题描述
在最近发布的Play Framework 2.0中，我想知道是否有人可以从较高的角度总结Play Framework 1和& amp;的主要区别. 2.
我已经编译了一些(播放1.0->播放2.0):
- 模板引擎:Groovy页面-> Scala模板
- 持久性:休眠-> Ebean
- 语言支持:Java-> Scala，Java
- 动态编译:字节码注入->通过SBT动态编译
- 构建系统:不适用-> SBT
- 可扩展性:模块，插件->子项目，插件，SBT插件
还有什么?阿卡?
这是我的列表，当然有些重复
-
破坏了向后兼容性(这是从头开始重写)
-
使用Scala和Java编程的核心(不要学习Scala进行协作)
-
模板的标量(但是正在将Groovy模板作为模块来完成，以简化迁移)，因此您必须指定每个参数的类型
-
sbt控制台而不是python脚本
-
sbt用于解决依赖关系，而不是内置解决方案(播放依赖项命令)
-
模块的可用性，显然将需要全部时间来迁移它们...
-
对于Java，它偏爱ebean代替hibernate(但您可以使用hibernate)
-
用于scala，带有anorm(但您可以使用其他库)
-
模块化程度更高，更易于选择其他组件
-
更多类型安全-在编译时检查视图甚至路由
-
更好的表现
-
类型安全支持，它是类型安全堆栈
-
更少的魔法，没有太多的字节码生成和类似的东西
-
更标准，(播放项目只是标准sbt项目)
-
不同的控制器API(更详细，恕我直言)，您可以比较 /controllers/Application.java>类似游戏2.0版
-
scala是一等公民，但同样支持java(每个人都有本机API)
-
热重编译速度较慢(它仍处于测试阶段，希望他们能够解决它)
-
对scala IDE的支持还不如java成熟(但它发展得很好)
-
委托给akka的异步支持
-
更好地为不同类型的数据源做好准备，例如nosql dbs
有关更多信息，请参见播放2.0页面(西班牙语翻译 RC1文档
无论如何，我认为主要区别在于play 1.x试图逃避j2ee的同时构建自己的堆栈，现在它们已成为基于scala，akka，sbt和支持的新的替代堆栈的一部分像类型安全公司这样的公司...
With the recent release of Play Framework 2.0, I would like to know if anyone could summarize ,from a high level standpoint, the major differences between Play Framework 1 & 2.
I already compiled a few (play 1.0 -> play 2.0):
- Template engine: Groovy Pages -> Scala Templates
- Persistance: Hibernate -> Ebean
- Language support: Java -> Scala, Java
- Dynamic compilation: byte code injection -> dynamic compilation via SBT
- Build system: n/a -> SBT
- Extensibility: Modules, Plugins -> SubProjects, Plugins, SBT plugin
What else ? Akka?
Here's my list, of course, with some duplications
breaks backward compatibility (it's a rewrite from scratch)
core programmed in scala vs java (got to learn scala to collaborate)
scala for templates (but work is being done on groovy templates as a module, to ease migration), so you have to specify the type of each parameter
sbt console instead of python scripts
sbt for solving dependencies instead of built-in solution (play dependencies command)
modules availability, it will obviously take some time to migrate them all...
for java, it favours ebean in place of hibernate (but you'll be able to use hibernate)
for scala, comes with anorm (but you'l be able to use other libraries)
more modular, easier to pick other components
more type safety - views and even routes are checked at compile time
better performance
typesafe support, it's part of typesafe stack
less magic, not so much bytecode generation and similar stuff
more standard, (play projects are just standard sbt projects)
different controller API (more verbose, IMHO) you can compare a simple play 1.x crud controller with a similar play 2.0 one
scala is a first class citizen, but java is equally supported (has native API for each of them)
hot recompiling is slower (it's still on beta, let's hope they solve it)
scala IDE support is not as mature as java's (but it's evolving nicely)
async support delegated to akka
better prepared for different kinds of datasources, like nosql dbs
For more info have a look at play 2.0 page (spanish translation available here) and the RC1 documentation
Anyway, I think the main difference is that play 1.x tried to build it's own stack while escaping away from j2ee, now they are part of a new and alternative stack, based on scala, akka, sbt and with the support of a company like typesafe...
这篇关于Play Framework 1.0和2.0之间的主要区别是什么?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
