昨天我看了一个关于Java Server Faces 2.0的演示,它看起来确实令人印象深刻,尽管我现在是一个快乐的ASP。asp.net MVC / jQuery开发。我最喜欢JSF的地方是它有大量支持ajax的UI组件,这使得开发比使用ASP要快得多。NET MVC,特别是在ajax较多的站点上。集成测试看起来也很不错。

由于这个演示只强调了JSF的优点,所以我也想听听其他方面的情况。

所以我的问题是:

Java Server Faces 2.0的主要缺点是什么? 什么会使JSF开发人员考虑使用ASP。NET MVC而不是JSF?


当前回答

我们使用JSF开发了一个示例项目(这是一个为期三周的研究,所以我们可能会丢失一些东西!)

我们尝试使用核心jsf,如果需要组件,我们使用PrimeFaces。

该项目是一个带有导航功能的网站。当点击菜单时,每个页面都应该通过ajax加载。

该网站有两个用例:

带有网格的页面。网格是通过ajax加载的,应该支持排序和分页 一个三步向导页面。每个页面都有客户端验证(用于简单验证)和服务器端ajax基础验证(用于复杂验证)。任何服务器异常(来自服务层)应该显示在向导的同一页上,而不需要导航到下一页。

我们发现:

You need to use some hacks from omniFaces to make the JSF view state fixed. The JSF state will be corrupted when you include pages via ajax in each other. This seems a bug in JSF and may be fixed on next releases (not in 2.3). The JSF Flow is not working correctly with ajax (or we could not make it work!) We try to use primeface wizard component instead but the client validation seems not supported and mean while it was not standard JSF flow standard. When using some jQuery components like jqGird, and you need to load JSON results, then you are advised to use pure servlet, The JSF will do nothing for you. So if you use these kind of components, your design will not fit in JSF. We try to do some client scripts when ajax complete by ajaxComplete and we found that the PF 4 has implemented its own ajax events. We had some jQuery components and we need to change their code.

如果您将上面的示例更改为非Ajax项目(或至少是较少的Ajax项目),您将不会面临上述许多问题。

我们将我们的研究总结为:

JSF在一个完全基于ajax的网站上不能很好地工作。

当然,我们发现JSF中有很多不错的特性,这些特性在某些项目中可能非常有用,所以请考虑您的项目需求。

请参考JSF技术文档来回顾JSF的优点,在我看来JSF最大的优点是来自@BalusC的完全和巨大的支持;-)

其他回答

在使用JSF工作了5年之后,我认为我可以添加我的2分。

Two major JSF drawbacks: Big learning curve. JSF is complex, that's just true. Its component nature. Component-based framework tries to hide the true nature of the Web, which comes with a huge amount of complications and disasters (like not supporting GET in JSF within almost 5 years). IMHO hiding HTTP Request/Response from the developer is an enormous mistake. From my experience, every component-based framework adds abstraction to the Web development, and that abstraction results in unnecessary overhead and higher complexity.

And minor drawbacks that come to my mind: By default ID of the object is composed of its parents' ids, for example form1:button1. No easy way to comment-out incorrect page's fragment. Tag <ui:remove> needs syntactically correct content which is parsed anyway. Low quality 3rd party components which e.g. don't check isRendered() inside processXxx() method before continuing. Incorporating LESS & Sencha is hard. Doesn't play well with REST. Not so easy for UX designers, because ready-to-use components have their own CSS styles, that need to be overwritten.

不要误会我的意思。作为一个组件框架,JSF在版本2中确实很好,但它仍然是基于组件的,而且永远是……

请看看Tapestry、Wicket的低人气以及有经验的JSF开发人员的低热情(这是更有意义的)。 作为对比,看看Rails、Grails、Django、Play!框架——它们都是基于动作的,不会试图向程序员隐藏真实的请求/响应和web的无状态特性。

对我来说,这是JSF的主要缺点。恕我直言,JSF可以适合某些类型的应用程序(内部网、表单密集型),但对于现实生活中的web应用程序来说,它不是一个好方法。

希望它能帮助一些人做出关于前端的选择。

评论我过去几个月的Primefaces/JSF体验:

如果你可以使用“现成的”组件,我想这并不可怕。 然而,当你走到外面并需要定制ui时,它就不能很好地发挥作用。-例如,我们需要在项目中使用Twitter的bootstrap。(不是primefaces bootstrap)。 现在我们的页面工作如下: 页面加载。 用户与具有ajax功能的Primefaces交互 Bootstrap的javascript绑定中断 我们运行额外的javascript来重新绑定所有内容

JSF避免编写javascript的承诺变成了编写比不使用Primefaces时更多的javascript——而javascript是用来修复Primefaces破坏的。

这是一个时间消耗器——除非你再次使用现成的东西。当不得不与Selenium一起工作时,也非常丑陋(Primefaces)。这些都是可以做到的,但是时间有限。

如果你和UX/设计团队一起工作,并且需要快速迭代UI,你可以通过学习jquery/编写直接的HTML来节省时间,或者查看react/angular。

For me the biggest shortcoming of JSF is poor support for programmatically (dynamically) generated pages. If you want to construct your page (create page component model) dynamically from java code. For example if you are working on WYSIWYG web page constructor. Adequate documentation of this use case in not generally available. There are many points where you have to experiment and development is quiet slow. Many things just don't work how you would expect. But generally its possible hack it somehow. Good thing is that it's not problem in philosophy or architecture of JSF. It's simply not elaborated enough (as far as I know).

JSF 2带来了组合组件,这将使组件开发变得容易,但是它们对动态(编程式)构造的支持非常差。如果你克服了动态组合组件构造的复杂且几乎没有文档的过程,你会发现如果你把几个组合组件嵌套得稍微深一点,它们就会停止工作,抛出一些异常。

但是JSF社区似乎意识到了这个缺点。你可以从这两个bug中看到,他们正在研究这个 http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES-1309 http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-599

至少在谈论规范时,JSF 2.2的情况会更好。

对我来说,JSF 2.0最大的缺点不仅是JSF的学习曲线,而且是为了让它做有用的工作而必须使用的组件库。想想你要真正精通需要处理的数量惊人的规范和标准:

HTML in the various incarnations. Don't pretend you don't need to know it. HTTP -- when you can't figure out what is going on you have to open Firebug and see. For that you need to know this. CSS -- Like it or not. It isn't so bad really and there are some nice tools out there at least. XML -- JSF will probably the first place you use namespaces to this degree. Servlet Specification. Sooner or later you will get into calling methods in this package. Aside from that you have to know how your Facelets gets turned into XHTML or whatever. JSP (mostly so you know why you don't need it in JSF) JSTL (again, mostly to cope with legacy framework) Expression Language (EL) in its various forms. ECMAScript, JavaScript, or whatever else you want to call it. JSON -- you should know this even if you don't use it. AJAX. I would say JSF 2.0 does a decent job of hiding this from you but you still need to know what is going on. The DOM. And how a browser uses it. See ECMAScript. DOM Events -- a topic all by itself. Java Persistence Architecture (JPA) that is if you want your app to have any back end data base. Java itself. JSEE while you are at it. The Context Dependency Injection specification (CDI) and how it clashes with and is used with JSF 2.0 JQuery -- I would like to see you get along without it.

现在,一旦你完成了这些,你就可以继续使用专有规范,即你将在此过程中获得的组件库和提供者库:

PrimeFaces(我选择的组件库) RichFaces MyFaces ICEFaces EclipseLink(我的JPA提供者) Hibernate 焊接

别忘了容器!所有这些配置文件:

GlassFish(2,3等) JBoss Tomcat

那么——这让事情变得简单了吗?当然,JSF 2.0很“简单”,只要你想做的只是最基本的web页面和最简单的交互。

简单地说,JSF 2.0是当今软件界所存在的最复杂和最麻烦的技术大杂烩。我想不出还有什么更好的方法。

我想到了一些缺点:

JSF is a component-based framework. This has inherent restrictions that have to do with obeying the component-model. AFAIK JSF supports only POST, so if you want a GET somewhere you have to do a plain servlet/JSP. Most components try to provide abstractions over domains like relational databases and front-end JavaScript, and many time these abstractions are "leaky" and very hard to debug. These abstractions might be a good starting point for a junior developer or someone not comfortable with a particular domain (e.g. front-end JavaScript), but are very hard to optimise for performance, since there are several layers involved, and most people that use them have little understanding of what is going on under the hood. The templating mechanisms that are usually used with JSF have nothing to do with how web desigers work. The WYSIWYG editors for JSF are primitive and in any case, your designer will give you HTML/CSS that you'll have to spend ages converting. Things like EL expressions are not statically checked and both the compiler and IDEs are not doing a good job at finding errors, so you'll end up with errors that you'll have to catch at run-time. This might be fine for dynamically typed language like Ruby or PHP, but if I have to withstand the sheer bloat of the Java ecosystem, I demand typing for my templates.

总而言之:使用JSF节省的时间,从避免编写JSP/servlet/bean样板代码,您将花费10倍的时间来使其可伸缩并完全按照您的要求进行操作。