4 ms·

How does it compare to Play! ?

• johnx123-up 15y ago
  Xitrum is more complete than Play! From the author https://groups.google.com/group/xitrum-framework/browse_thread/thread/82bc8f85ffc87325 https://groups.google.com/group/xitrum-framework/browse_thre...
  • noelwelsh 15y ago
    That reply seems to reference Play 1.x, which is a very different beast from Play 2 (I've just completed a project using the Play 2 beta). I haven't used Xitrium. I think Play 2 is very good if you want a RESTful web application and you want to render pages on the server-side (which is largely what I wanted for my project). For my current project I've found we're shifting to client-side rendering, and then these kind of web frameworks are redundant, with BlueEyes being a much better fit.
    • deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    • drKarl 15y ago
      I've used Play! with haml-js, rendering haml templates on client-side.
    • ngocdaothanh 15y ago
      Xitrum tries to catch up with latest practices in web development. It supports client-side rendering style by integrating Knockout.js. See the Todos demo: https://github.com/ngocdaothanh/xitrum-demos/blob/master/src/main/scala/quickstart/controller/Todos.scala https://github.com/ngocdaothanh/xitrum-demos/blob/master/src... https://github.com/ngocdaothanh/xitrum-demos/blob/master/src/main/view/scalate/quickstart/controller/Todos/index.jade https://github.com/ngocdaothanh/xitrum-demos/blob/master/src... You can focus on working with JS objects on browser side, and with Scala case classes on server side. Xitrum converts data back and forth for you. APIs for Knockout.js will be improved more in the future.