Comment On Enterprise Conversion Quirks

When Dean Cleaver took a job at a large corporation, he was expecting to experience some enterprise. After all, the company was in the top 50 of the Fortune 500, so if anyone would have enterprise, it sure would be these guys. [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3Next »

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:02 • by TankerJoe
Alex Papadimoulis:

  1. Go to the File menu and click Save As.
  2. In the File Name box, enter the page's name, but use an ASPX at the end (i.e. "login.aspx")
  3. Select "Web Page, Complete" from the File Type the Click OK
  4. Add the newly saved file (login.aspx) and it's corresponding folder (login_files) to the ASP.NET project
  5. Edit the ASPX page and add the appropriate server-side code
  6. Navigate through the application and repeat for every page


You forgot:
  
    7. ???
    8. Profit!




Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:05 • by ParkinT
Enterprise++

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:07 • by AI0867
78139 in reply to 78064
Anonymous:
Run... Run for the hills!!!

run for your life!

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:10 • by Guy
78140 in reply to 78112
Uhh, the Fortune 500 is the list of top grossing US companies.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:17 • by Paul W.
78142 in reply to 78126
Anonymous:

Anonymous:

Im pretty sure my girlfriend would disown me if i spent my free time rewriting a "enterprise" web application.


HA HA! Best joke of the day! No one who posts, let alone reads, this website has a girlfriend!



Wrong.  I read this site, and I am married--


Oh, crap, you're right!

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:23 • by asdqwe
78143 in reply to 78126
Anonymous:

Anonymous:
Anonymous:
FWIW, I would have rewritten the site anyway on my own time.  When el senior management comes by to see the progress, show them the enhancements to see if they are good to go---THEN drop the bomb that you rewrote everything.


Im pretty sure my girlfriend would disown me if i spent my free time rewriting a "enterprise" web application.


HA HA! Best joke of the day! No one who posts, let alone reads, this website has a girlfriend!



But then, who really wants one?

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:39 • by Satanicpuppy
78144 in reply to 78069
isaphrael:
Alex Papadimoulis:

... after receiving his first assignment to make a minor change to 100+ Javascript and CSS files, Dean decided that this type enterprise is not the type of experience he's looking for.




wow, too bad dead didn't know that UltraEdit [www.ultraedit.com] has a 'find & replace across files & directories' function.

[i'm not a shill.  at least, not a piad one]


Eh. Most web editors will do that, and hell, I can probably cobble together a shell script to do it, if I felt like re-inventing the wheel.

People who have that little idea what they're doing should never ever ever be allowed to work on production code. If you don't have any idea how to convert it, then don't touch it. If it absolutely has to be converted, do it right. End of story.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:43 • by Bus Raker
78145 in reply to 78098

Anonymous:
Anonymous:
FWIW, I would have rewritten the site anyway on my own time.  When el senior management comes by to see the progress, show them the enhancements to see if they are good to go---THEN drop the bomb that you rewrote everything.


Im pretty sure my girlfriend would disown me if i spent my free time rewriting a "enterprise" web application.


The real WTF is that your girlfriend can't develop ASP.Net

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 17:48 • by Bus Raker
78147 in reply to 78143
Anonymous:
Anonymous:

Anonymous:
Anonymous:
FWIW, I would have rewritten the site anyway on my own time.  When el senior management comes by to see the progress, show them the enhancements to see if they are good to go---THEN drop the bomb that you rewrote everything.


Im pretty sure my girlfriend would disown me if i spent my free time rewriting a "enterprise" web application.


HA HA! Best joke of the day! No one who posts, let alone reads, this website has a girlfriend!




But then, who really wants one?


I believe only the females that read this forum have girlfriends.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 18:08 • by maht
I could factorize that with a sed script to get rid of the folders

"ultraedit, seartch & replace across directories"  pah, that sort of thinking is what comes from using Windows for too long.

A bit of shell scripting was able to do that 30 years ago, it really isn't hard.

The use of Windows in an educational enviroment should be left until the final year and even then for one semester.


Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 18:20 • by OneFactor
78150 in reply to 78100

Anonymous:


I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit. Maybe its just me but if you have the attitude of "my boss told me to do something that is stupid so i will just quit" why not go for broke and tell him its stupid. Say this isn't the best way of doing things, here are the reasons why, and here is the way it should be done.

This site is full of stories about programmers that would rather cut and run then try to make it better. Thats the real WTF.


Exactly, the proper "Enterprise" solution to bad directives from a manager should already belong to our collective memories. But for those who have forgotten:


Commodore Matt Decker: For the fourth time, a rewrite is not on the table.
Spock: That sir, would be suicide. Attempted suicide is evidence of mental instability. If you persist in this course of action, I will relieve you of duty, have security escort you off the bridge, and into sickbay for medical treatment.
Decker: You're bluffing.
Spock: Vulcan's never bluff.
Decker: No, I don't suppose they do...

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 18:26 • by Jon
78151 in reply to 78100
Anonymous:
I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit.
That's the thing: they 'say' they would do it, but it doesn't mean they actually would.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 18:38 • by Gene Wirchenko
78152 in reply to 78151
Anonymous:
Anonymous:
I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit.


That's the thing: they 'say' they would do it, but it doesn't mean they actually would.


Whether they actually do or not, it probably does affect morale.  Some may not quit on the spot, but maybe, they start looking elsewhere.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 18:58 • by ME
78154 in reply to 78143
wouldn't mind one, but I don't think my wife would approve!!

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 18:59 • by ME
78156 in reply to 78143
that last message was in relpy to this

Anonymous:
Anonymous:

Anonymous:
Anonymous:
FWIW, I would have rewritten the site anyway on my own time.  When el senior management comes by to see the progress, show them the enhancements to see if they are good to go---THEN drop the bomb that you rewrote everything.


Im pretty sure my girlfriend would disown me if i spent my free time rewriting a "enterprise" web application.


HA HA! Best joke of the day! No one who posts, let alone reads, this website has a girlfriend!



But then, who really wants one?

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 19:05 • by TH
78157 in reply to 78078
I'd sure like to have asked the PHB why a rewrite was out of the question.

I recently left a place with this same attitude. The reason generally given was that the app works: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

What it really means is that management thinks a rewrite will be over budget, take too long, and won't work when its finished; they don't trust programmers to get the job done. Even if maintenance ends up costing more in the long run, its predictable and very low risk.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 19:23 • by nsimeonov
78158 in reply to 78152

Gene Wirchenko:
Anonymous:
Anonymous:
I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit.


That's the thing: they 'say' they would do it, but it doesn't mean they actually would.


Whether they actually do or not, it probably does affect morale.  Some may not quit on the spot, but maybe, they start looking elsewhere.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


 


Oh boy... I would really want to start working for a company like this..... BUT as a contractor! People like this are like a gold mine. Anything better than what they have would be amazing to them and hence (over)charging them wouldn't be a problem. Besides I've seen much worse cases, so fixing this one wouldn't be such a big deal...

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 19:34 • by nsimeonov
78159 in reply to 78157

Anonymous:
I'd sure like to have asked the PHB why a rewrite was out of the question.

I recently left a place with this same attitude. The reason generally given was that the app works: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

What it really means is that management thinks a rewrite will be over budget, take too long, and won't work when its finished; they don't trust programmers to get the job done. Even if maintenance ends up costing more in the long run, its predictable and very low risk.


 


So did they give you deadlines or so? With a sh***y project like this  you could "milk the cow" and relax while doing next to nothing until they are convinced that a rewrite may help actually... just an idea.. hate saying this but I know people doing this and actually being happy about it.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 20:46 • by Roger
Can I have the manager's job please? :D

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 20:51 • by Michael Rutherfurd
78161 in reply to 78158
nsimeonov:

Gene Wirchenko:
Anonymous:
Anonymous:
I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit.


That's the thing: they 'say' they would do it, but it doesn't mean they actually would.


Whether they actually do or not, it probably does affect morale.  Some may not quit on the spot, but maybe, they start looking elsewhere.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


 


Oh boy... I would really want to start working for a company like this..... BUT as a contractor! People like this are like a gold mine. Anything better than what they have would be amazing to them and hence (over)charging them wouldn't be a problem. Besides I've seen much worse cases, so fixing this one wouldn't be such a big deal...



I'm currently in the process of doing the opposite :-) We have both IIS (vb.net running asmx web services) and Tomcat (running the web application) running on the same web servers. The original designer could not figure out how to write web services in java. I got so sick of the conflicts and complexities that I started the rewrite in my own time at home. Luckily my wife is an understanding sort :-) Happy ending is that when I told the manager what I was doing he insisted on paying me for the work :-)

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 21:15 • by sdasdfgsdgsdg
78162 in reply to 78124
Benanov:
Anonymous:
There are no 1.2 and 1.3 versions of the .NET framework.


RTFP.  Notice the word our before the word framework. My company has a base framework for projects that is maintained by a different department.

Sorry, please try again.


I did apologize, dumb ass.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 21:45 • by ithika
78163 in reply to 78162
Anonymous:
I did apologize, dumb ass.


Are all your apologies so gracious?

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 22:30 • by Cheong
78164 in reply to 78083
Anonymous:

I would have used a crawler like web whacker and resticted to the site, and have a static picture of site in minutes.


Then calclulated the time it would have take and devote the time to find a new job!


 


WTF- rewrite is off the table, for a conversion!!!!

Yes. Using programs like "wget" would be a lot faster than using "Save as" for each page in IE... but perheps you still got a chance.

1) Copy all the image/script folder from the old JSP site to the new ASP.NET site.
2) Use "search" with "project" scope to search all lines contains ".file" folder names and replace them one by one.
3) Rename all the ".file" folder to ".file_" and see if anything is missing. Adjust accordingly.

If the there's no further trouble involved, all the conversion would be done from "within an afternoon" to "one week", and the manager would be happy to grant your the time to "remove the pin at the a**" (This should prevent him from hiring decent enough developers)


Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 22:37 • by mjonhanson
78165 in reply to 78085
This amazing piece of sh...WTFery...I'm 90% sure is brought to you by
the 29th member on the Fortune 500 list.  I spent some time on a project
there, cutting and pasting mainframe "forms" into .asp pages and adding
the naughty server bits later.  The real WTF is that it may be the
same application, probably converted from asp to jsp to .net. 
Classic.  I ran away quickly from this one too, smartest thing I
ever did.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 22:50 • by lrb
78166 in reply to 78164

The secret is to not ever refer to what you are doing as a rewrite.  Instead call  it a shortcut, streamlining, or someother phraseology  that connotates doing it cheaper, faster, and/or more efficiently. 


Then do it the way that best meets the constraints in resources and time that have been allocated for the project.  Most management hasn't a clue so long as you use the words that they're looking for. 


Manager:  "You're not doing a rewrite are you?"


Me: "No, I'm taking the fastest and cheapest approach?  Do, you want me to do it slower or more costly?"


Manager: " No, of course not.  Only a idiot would ask for something like that.  BTW how's that new web app coming?  You're not using any other tools other than notepad are you?"


 


 

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-19 23:28 • by RyuO
78171 in reply to 78165
mjonhanson:
This amazing piece of sh...WTFery...I'm 90% sure is brought to you by
the 29th member on the Fortune 500 list.  I spent some time on a project
there, cutting and pasting mainframe "forms" into .asp pages and adding
the naughty server bits later.  The real WTF is that it may be the
same application, probably converted from asp to jsp to .net. 
Classic.  I ran away quickly from this one too, smartest thing I
ever did.

I've worked for about 20 companies in the Fortune 500, and if you count nested subcontractors, probably twice that. I can tell you from personal experience that any one of them is capable of doing something that dumb; not only that, but on a scale far beyond what we're talking about here. The ASP converter looks to be a $2m project - multiply that by 300 and you're up in the EDS/Telco/Accenture range.

Sometimes it helps to try to duplicate the thought processes that cause these debacles; what sounds right to me is:
  • They gave me a $2m budget,
  • To manage a bunch of techies for a year,
  • I'm not accountable for WHAT gets done,
  • But my peers will think I'm not a team player if I make demands on them,
  • So I can't change anything outside my project.
See, rational decision-making, and a WTF! What Joy!

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 00:52 • by Just Me
"For the IE deprived, allow me to expand on step four."

Actually Firefox has "Web Page, complete" save option too... Nonetheless, what a "nice" "conversion"...

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 03:43 • by home homine lupus est
78182 in reply to 78175
This will create a copy of the site (with 32 levels of deep):



wget -r -l 32 --no-parent http://serversite/page/



theres even shareware tools for windows, that most users know, teleport or other.



you can even download a help compiler, and build a CHM file from that
mirror.  Having a compresses file copy of the old site can be
convenient.



Also can be a good idea to buy a book about reformulation (yea, I know, that is a migration, but anyway... )



--Tei





Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 03:43 • by Joe Bloggs
78183 in reply to 78112
>WRONG! Where are non-US companies ?

Outside the US is naught but formless ghosts, miles of howling wasteland and currencies entirely unlike the US Lira.

This post brought to you by the leaning captcha of pizza.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 04:00 • by belugabob
78184 in reply to 78100

Anonymous:


I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit. Maybe its just me but if you have the attitude of "my boss told me to do something that is stupid so i will just quit" why not go for broke and tell him its stupid. Say this isn't the best way of doing things, here are the reasons why, and here is the way it should be done.

This site is full of stories about programmers that would rather cut and run then try to make it better. Thats the real WTF.


Those programmers probably wasted several years 'trying to make things better' in previous jobs and have decided to not go through the heartache again. Unless you've been in this soul destroying situation, I'm not surprised that you 'don't get it'.
By all means try to convince the PHB that there's a better way to do things, but try to recognise a lost cause when you see one.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 04:25 • by Mario
78185 in reply to 78085
Anonymous:






























10 Intl. Business Machines 91,134.0 7,934.0
13 Berkshire Hathaway 81,663.0 8,528.0
26 Boeing 54,848.0 2,572.0
48 Microsoft 39,788.0 12,254.0
49 Intel 38,826.0 8,664.0
It shouldn't be one of these though, one may expect these companies to have decent IT personnel. Except number 13: I'm sure there's no development being done at Berkshire Hathaway.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 04:46 • by agh!
78186 in reply to 78184
Anonymous:

Anonymous:


I find it pretty amazing how many of you say you would up an quit. Maybe its just me but if you have the attitude of "my boss told me to do something that is stupid so i will just quit" why not go for broke and tell him its stupid. Say this isn't the best way of doing things, here are the reasons why, and here is the way it should be done.

This site is full of stories about programmers that would rather cut and run then try to make it better. Thats the real WTF.


Those programmers probably wasted several years 'trying to make things better' in previous jobs and have decided to not go through the heartache again. Unless you've been in this soul destroying situation, I'm not surprised that you 'don't get it'.
By all means try to convince the PHB that there's a better way to do things, but try to recognise a lost cause when you see one.



I try to detect bad situations like this at interview time and avoid starting there in the first place.  If I'm in the bad situation I try once, and once only to explain the problem to get things changed.  Past experience teaches me that if they don't listen the first time, they are not going to and it's time to bail out.  Life's too short for putting up with that bad situation.


For "Large Enterprise" read "capable of even greater stupidity than you though imaginable".  Politics comes into play too much in large enterprises.  Politics and (software) engineering don't mix.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 04:51 • by GD
78187 in reply to 78182
winhttrack (freeware) will do it on windoze

photogenic captcha

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 06:36 • by BlueEagle
The dictionary needs revision:

en·ter·prise P Pronunciation Key (ntr-prz)
n.
1. An undertaking, especially one of some scope, complication, and risk.
2. A business organization.
3. Industrious, systematic activity, especially when directed toward profit: Private enterprise is basic to capitalism.
4. Willingness to undertake new ventures; initiative: “Through want of enterprise and faith men are where they are, buying and selling, and spending their lives like serfs” (Henry David Thoreau).
5. Manegemental IT-stupidity carried out by subdued subjects often producing solutions that are far from businessenhancing: We need to make our webpages enterprise.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 06:49 • by avery

it would be much easier to build another similar application in .net than try editing those files. ^_^


i've tried conversion from a java based project into the asp .net framework, but i did not use the same files, except for the css i think.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 07:49 • by doodle
78196 in reply to 78069

Alex Papadimoulis:
wow, too bad dead didn't know that UltraEdit [www.ultraedit.com] has a 'find & replace across files & directories' function.

[i'm not a shill.  at least, not a piad one]


So does Visual Studio... he had the tool right there in front of him!

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 08:47 • by coz
78200 in reply to 78196

Visual Slickedit also....but that's already considering solving this stupid task.


But WAIT..."Let's talk about...money" How much was he paid by the "Enterprise"; what salary did he have...because you see...you can always say "OK, I'm almost done, just a few minor bug fixes remain"....and you can stretch that for months on end...'till you buy a nice car, or for a Eurpean vacation...and then quit, saying "My efforts are not appreciated! All these pages I ported from ASP to JSP (or whatever), and still no raise, no promotion...not even feedback....I'm pissed off! I quit!" ....Sadly I know of such case in reality...I'll tell you another time ;


 


Nice site; makes my day, every Day !

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 10:28 • by Todd Hile-Hoffer
78208 in reply to 78091
Television God is so right. If you have the skills then re-do as much of the project that you can. Talk to your manager and explain what it is going on. If you can't help him to see... Then find someone who will.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 11:00 • by masklinn
78213 in reply to 78187
Anonymous:
winhttrack (freeware) will do it on windoze

photogenic captcha

It's built on wget anyway, and I found wget to be much more stable and reliable if slightly harder to get the first time around.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 11:56 • by impslayer
78226 in reply to 78124

Benanov:
Anonymous:
There are no 1.2 and 1.3 versions of the .NET framework.


RTFP.  Notice the word our before the word framework. My company has a base framework for projects that is maintained by a different department.

Sorry, please try again.



Heh, another one to post without looking through all posts... The WTF is that the post just before this IS an apology for said mistake :)

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 12:24 • by lrb
78233 in reply to 78226
impslayer:

Benanov:
Anonymous:
There are no 1.2 and 1.3 versions of the .NET framework.


RTFP.  Notice the word our before the word framework. My company has a base framework for projects that is maintained by a different department.

Sorry, please try again.



Heh, another one to post without looking through all posts... The WTF is that the post just before this IS an apology for said mistake :)



The post before was an apology, however the apology had no context to let it be known what previous post of the author's it, the apology post, was apologizing.  Also, the time lag between the 2 post was only about 24 minutes, could be just a time lag.  Not everyone refreshes and checks for new post before posting.  The real WTF IMO is cases where people assume too much and investigate too little before posting a condescending reply.  But that's only human nature.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 12:45 • by Webzter

Man, so Dean quit over a simple find and replace job? I'm guessing this had to be the final straw and he wanted to quit anyway. Anyone that hopes to survive a Fortune 500 with their sanity in-tact had better become a competent guerilla coder.


Just looking at this limited example, it seems that it would have been trivial for Dean to write a sed script, or a vb script, or used Visual Studio / UltraEdit / EditPlus, or a myriad of other tools for the replace. Or, if all of the files were identical, he could, I dunno, change one file and then overlay all of the others.


Getting fancier, it would have been trivial to move the common files to a common place and rewritten the aspx pages to point to the new location. If he needed to tell someone, he could have called it 'a necessary architectural refactoring'. Managers eat that shit up with a spoon. It would be fairly trivial to baseline the savings in terms of hours needed for future, similar, enhancements.


It's a useful strategy to carry forward with the rest of the application as well. As new enhancements come in, add a small amount of time for refactoring, or unit testing, whatever. Either be straightforward with what the time is being used for or bury it... either way, it's a simple case for the effort. If it comes to it, it wouldn't be hard to insist that the rework is needed in order to accomplish some part of the enhancement. Your manager will likely either not be tech-savvy enough to really know or know you're bluffing but care about the quality of the system as well.


I had the opportunity to squeeze in a rewrite of a horrific system at work. The reason they didn't want to properly rewrite the system was due to both dev and QA cost. I worked on the rewrite on my free time (between projects, over lunch, other time at work that's typically wasted). I was able to reduce the code base by 73% while adding a full suite of unit tests. Once I was done, it was painless to lay a case out for my boss on how many hours would be saved on maintenance (this was one of our costliest components to maintain). After showing him the code reduction, the automated unit tests, and the estimated support savings, funding came very quickly for QA testing.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 13:17 • by Benanov
78244 in reply to 78233
lrb:
impslayer:

Benanov:
Anonymous:
There are no 1.2 and 1.3 versions of the .NET framework.


RTFP.  Notice the word our before the word framework. My company has a base framework for projects that is maintained by a different department.

Sorry, please try again.



Heh, another one to post without looking through all posts... The WTF is that the post just before this IS an apology for said mistake :)



The post before was an apology, however the apology had no context to let it be known what previous post of the author's it, the apology post, was apologizing.  Also, the time lag between the 2 post was only about 24 minutes, could be just a time lag.  Not everyone refreshes and checks for new post before posting.  The real WTF IMO is cases where people assume too much and investigate too little before posting a condescending reply.  But that's only human nature.



As the original poster, I definitely missed that apology post.  Going back and reading it...it's not linked to any of the previous posts at all, so that's probably why I missed it.

So, my apology is warranted here.  Sorry I missed your post, Mr sdfasdgasdgsadg.

At any rate...let's just forget the whole thing, shall we?

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 13:48 • by merreborn
78249 in reply to 78237
Anonymous:
Man, so Dean quit over a simple find and replace job?


Find and replace is not a workable development methodology.  This wasn't ONE find and replace, this was a career of find and replaces we're talking about.

Back when I started here, we didn't use version control.  My boss made me merge and remerge 3 source trees using WinDiff every few days.  Those were dark, dark times.  I begged for CVS, got it, and suddenly my productivity shot up 300% -- since I didn't have to spend most of my week crawling through WinDiff.

Of course, the Indian programmer we had on the team liked to cvs update his directory on the server, over-write the entire dir with his entire local copy of the code (wiping out any changes brought in by the update) and commit, backing out all our changes.  He also liked to wrap 70 line javascript functions in PHP echos, instead of just writing 'em raw.  God was I glad when we god rid of him.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 13:58 • by tony

Why are so many people talking about ways to convert from JSP to ASP.NET?  The site has already been converted.    The WTF has been committed and its history.


 


Dean's role in this organization was to maintain a large and growing web application.  If he really wanted to get enterprise experience, he should have made an effort to refactor the application.   In the long run, Dean could have gained great experience transforming a WTF into true enterprise application for a fortune 50 company.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 14:02 • by home homine lupus est
78253 in reply to 78249
merreborn:

Find and replace is not a workable
development methodology.  This wasn't ONE find and replace, this
was a career of find and replaces we're talking about.




Theres good editors out here:



VI, is the better, widen support (sudo apt-get gvim)

EMACS, is to complex

Notepad, is slighty underpowered, the windows native one.

JEdit, written in java

Perl, is read only

SciTE, is a secret and forbidden cult

Visual C++6 with Tomato, you can code Perl with it!



I think can be a good idea to use a editor that support Reformulation
features. The machine can understand code, with a parser that support
the sintax of lang. So can be mostly safe to rename functions and
variables to fit conventions, and fix typo/mental errors.



I have a secret guru here, on my city, and this guy say:



"Code evolve, and good code evolve to be flexible".



Too bad my secret guru is a .NET coder, and I code on PHP, Perl, C and Javascript :((((



--Tei





Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 16:39 • by aikimark
78324 in reply to 78109
Anonymous:

How would you smartasses QUICKLY convert a jsp application to an aspx application ?!


I would use Microsoft's variant, J# and the latest VisualStudio.Net IDE


I would put the current Java code through some kind of analysis tool and look at places to refactor the code.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 16:53 • by enterprisey!
Alex Papadimoulis:


When Dean Cleaver took a job at a large corporation, he was expecting to experience some enterprise. After all, the company was in the top 50 of the Fortune 500, so if anyone would have enterprise, it sure would be these guys.


Dean's specific role in this organization was to be one of six developers on a newly-created team to maintain a large and growing web application. In his orientation, he learned that the application was converted from Java Server Pages to ASP.NET about a year ago and that rewriting the application was "off the table" for now. Dean thought it was a bit odd that the manager mentioned this *four separate times* without being prompted or asked in any way, but didn't otherwise take much note of it.


When it finally came time to dig into the code, Dean noticed that a few "quirks" remained from the JSP-ASP.NET conversion. Oh, and I should probably mention that "quirks" is my word choice. The exact words that Dean used to describe these were a bit too harsh for this or, really, any publication hoping to make it past even the most liberal firewall. The conversion process used might explain why:



  1. Open up the Web Application in a web browser (the login page will appear)
  2. Go to the File menu and click Save As.
  3. In the File Name box, enter the page's name, but use an ASPX at the end (i.e. "login.aspx")
  4. Select "Web Page, Complete" from the File Type the Click OK
  5. Add the newly saved file (login.aspx) and it's corresponding folder (login_files) to the ASP.NET project
  6. Edit the ASPX page and add the appropriate server-side code
  7. Navigate through the application and repeat for every page

For the IE deprived, allow me to expand on step four. When Internet Explorer saves as a "Web Page, Complete" it creates a folder (e.g. "login_files"), downloads *all* image, javascript, and CSS files, and places them all in that folder. It then saves the file with all of the image, javascript, and CSS references pointing to that folder. For example, saving a "Web Page, Complete" from this very site produces no less than seventeen files in that folder.


But back to Dean, there were, all in all, there were 203 ASPX pages, 121 "_files" folders, and just as many copies of the same images, stylesheets, and javascripts. To remain consistent, each page had a slightly different coding style and communicated with each other in a slightly different manner. Some of the central pages had to read input parameters (such as username) in the querystring, cookies, and session.


The database, at first glance, was about at the same level. Unfortunately, we won't get to see that in much detail as, after receiving his first assignment to make a minor change to 100+ Javascript and CSS files, Dean decided that this type enterprise is not the type of experience he's looking for.



this is nothing...  wait until they convert it back to jsp...

THEEEEEENNNNNN... you'll see a real enterprisey wtf!

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 16:53 • by TC
78328 in reply to 78125

There are plenty of Open Source .Net projects. Besides, using Java, you are stuck with Sun's way of doing things instead of MS. I went to a news update on Sun's visions for Java recently. They seemed to be stuck. They had a new way of dotting your way through xml, but that was about it. Borring and depressing, as I think there is room for improvement in Java. I work with Java and .Net 50/50. I prefer .Net because I think that its easier to use. I simply think that the framework is easier to work with.

Re: Enterprise Conversion Quirks

2006-06-20 17:17 • by nsimeonov
78332 in reply to 78328
Anonymous:

There are plenty of Open Source .Net projects. Besides, using Java, you are stuck with Sun's way of doing things instead of MS. I went to a news update on Sun's visions for Java recently. They seemed to be stuck. They had a new way of dotting your way through xml, but that was about it. Borring and depressing, as I think there is room for improvement in Java. I work with Java and .Net 50/50. I prefer .Net because I think that its easier to use. I simply think that the framework is easier to work with.



 


Not to mention, that Visual Studio.NET is far better than any Java IDEs IMO.

« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3Next »

Add Comment