TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

What’s new in Play 2.2

92 点作者 proxyswapi超过 11 年前

3 条评论

saryant超过 11 年前
We&#x27;re using Play pretty heavily at our startup though not for our customer-facing frontend, that&#x27;s still in Rails.<p>What we love about Play:<p>* Async everything, especially the web service library<p>* JSON macros<p>* Scala-based templates<p>* Integration with Akka<p>* Support for server-sent events (we use this for cluster monitoring)<p>What we wish was better:<p>* JSON deserialization performance isn&#x27;t as good as raw Jackson yet. (Our PR regarding this is actually in 2.2, should be better now)<p>* Documentation could be much better, we still have to resort to the API to figure out a lot of stuff<p>I&#x27;ve been using Play ever since the 2.0-RC days and it&#x27;s definitely made some huge gains since then. We use Akka very heavily, especially its clustering, and Play works well in conjunction with that though there are still some gotchas lurking about.<p>Our backend is one big Akka cluster right now. We&#x27;ve had a few hiccups but overall it&#x27;s been a hugely enjoyable experience.
评论 #6420672 未加载
评论 #6419731 未加载
评论 #6419653 未加载
评论 #6419510 未加载
评论 #6419491 未加载
russ519超过 11 年前
For those that have some experience using Play with both Java and Scala, which Play variant do you enjoy working with the most? It sounds like there are some API difference between the Java and Scala versions and I&#x27;m curious whether those differences are a factor in deciding whether to go Java or Scala with Play. I&#x27;m a long time Java developer, envious of Ruby, interested in Scala for its potential in being a hybrid of the two.
评论 #6419487 未加载
评论 #6419811 未加载
评论 #6420360 未加载
ejain超过 11 年前
Play is an interesting option if 1. you need async request handling (most people don&#x27;t), 2. are comfortable with Scala, and 3. don&#x27;t mind maintaining your own branch of the framework (or can pay for commercial support).<p>Otherwise there are better options, given the hard to configure and slow build process, bloated artifacts, infrequent releases, missing features (in the Java version) and incomplete&#x2F;outdated documentation.