RE: beans and JSPs and stuff... -- JAVA400-L

--snip RPG slam for the good of the people and the list--

  In 
> the simplest implementation, You need TWO pieces of syntax:
> 
> <BEAN name="widget" type="WidgetType"></BEAN>
> and
> <%= widget.setStyle("bgcolor", "green"); %>
> and
> <% widget %>

Right, just like I can say:
<!--exec #cgi="/cgi-bin/mycgi?bgcolor=green"-->

And I can also build the above statment dynamically as well, as to not
hardcode the background color.

Is that SO different, or are you going to say it was a bad JSP example?

> >If I have to tell a web programmer which methods and classes to
> >use, I may as well just do it myself.
> -------------
> As I read this, I'm struck that a web designer would consider 
> this statement to be the height of arrogance.  

I wouldn't.  All of the "web programmers" I've dealt with try to do too much
on the other end of the spectrum and cause major headaches that can't be
solved because the site just went "live" and changing it is not an option.

The web programmers don't understand the backend software or database
design, yet try to design web pages to interface with them.  It doesn't work
unless they stick strictly to making it perrty.  Which they don't most of
the time.  Its a grey area where perrty ends and interface design begins,
which in your arguments, is the ideal situation.

Years of experience here on this subject, so again, give me the benifit of
the doubt.

Every decent 
> web designer I know knows enough about JavaScript to be able 
> to handle calling a method of an object.  

Please, send them our way if they want a job!  Honest!  The ones I deal with
rarely know to trim trailing spaces from a value before checking it for
null.

They've been 
> writing procedures and handling arrays and loops and 
> variables for quite some time.  You won't have to hold their 
> hands and teach them, Bradley, they may well be able to teach 
> YOU a thing or two about basic Java syntax.

was that a personal attack?  I've been doing all you mentioned for over 20
years.  Most web designers aren't even that old.

> 
> On the other hand, if you have to design your code to be used 
> by someone else, you have to do things in a logical, 
> consistent manner that can be documented and explained.  

Please, this argument holds as much water as cheesecloth.  It's true, but
it's rarely, if ever, a reality.  

And 
> if you don't design things well, it's much easier to do all 
> the work yourself.  Personally, I enjoy exposing my methods 
> to the outside world - it gets me invaluable feedback on how 
> I can do things better.

Again, this is all true in the ideal of situations, but it's never like
that, Joe.  That's where my "theory vs. reality" argument comes right into
play (holy smokes, full circle!).  If we were in heaven programming, I would
agree with EVERYTHING you said.  When I hear some arguements from people I
wonder when they were last working for a company that needed this huge
project done yesterday even though it requires 3 months of design, 4 months
of programming and 1 month of testing to do it right.

Brad

> +---
> | This is the JAVA/400 Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to JAVA400-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to JAVA400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to 
> JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner: joe@zappie.net
> +---
> 
+---
| This is the JAVA/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to JAVA400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to JAVA400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: joe@zappie.net
+---