有人用过TIBCO GI吗？
I was checking out the TIBCO GI the other day and I was impressed.
- Has anyone used it extensively?
- What are your thoughts?
- What drawbacks did you encounter?
- Is it suitable for Internet or only Intranet apps?
I appreciate any input you can shed on this.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
是的，我已经广泛使用了它，以下是我的一些想法。 将在发生时添加它们。
我不评价在框架本身中实现 IDE 的方法（它在浏览器窗口中运行）。 有很多很多的怪癖，它可能会导致非常令人沮丧的体验。 我通常使用 Javascript 调试窗口来运行 IDE 本身，在 Intellij Idea 中开发所有 JS、XML 等。 在处理文件后，必须在 IDE 中重新加载它，但它的效率仍然要高得多。
使用 IDE，可以相对快速地布置整个应用程序。
学习曲线相当陡峭。 API 非常广泛，当您遇到问题时，社区论坛也不是很好。
大部分 GUI 绘制都是使用内联样式属性完成的，这使得它们很难换肤并让整个应用程序看起来完全符合您的要求。 如果是因为这个原因，我认为 GI 比公开的应用程序更适合 Intranet 应用程序。
GI 使用“双 DOM”方法，保存每个屏幕元素的内部表示。 这使得完全集成其他框架（例如 JQuery 等）变得困难。
随着 RIAD 环境的发展，我认为它非常棒。 我发现使用 GI 方式做事比请求/响应路线快两个数量级。
我真的很喜欢强制分离表示和业务逻辑。
他们放入的 JS 扩展，如 introspective 包、接口和类定义非常聪明且非常有用。
Yes, I have used it pretty extensively, here are some of my thoughts. Will add to them as the occur.
I don't rate the approach of implementing the IDE in the framework itself (it runs in a browser window). There are many, many quirks and it can lead to a very frustrating experience. I normally develop all of the JS, XML etc in Intellij Idea using the Javascript debug window to run the IDE itself. After working on a file, it has to be reloaded in the IDE, but its still much more efficient.
Using the IDE, an entire application can be layed out relatively quickly.
There is a pretty steep learning curve. The API is extensive and the community forums aren't great when you do run into problems.
Much of the GUI painting is done using inline style attributes, making them difficult to skin and get the overall application looking exactly how you might want. If is for this reason that I think GI is more suited to intranet apps than publicly available ones.
GI uses a 'dual DOM' approach, holding it's own internal representation of each on-screen element. This can make it difficult to fully integrate other frameworks such as JQuery etc.
As RIAD environments go, I think it is awesome. I find that doing things the GI way is an order of two faster than going down the request/response route.
I really like the enforced separation of presentation and business logic.
The JS extensions they put in, like introspective package, interface and class definitions are quite clever and very useful.
我完全同意 mysomic，但是：
不幸的是，Tibco GI 在重量和运行速度方面有一个巨大的缺点。
jQuery 快得多。
我还遇到了在 IE 和 Firefox 下开发的 UI 的不同行为的问题。
缺乏文档。
I completely agree with mysomic, but:
Unfortunately Tibco GI has a huge disadvantage of it's weight and how slow it runs.
jQuery is much much faster.
Also I run into issues of different behavior of developed UI under IE and firefox.
Lack of documentation.
我在某些方面同意你的观点：
比较JQuery和GI，我认为它们不是一个级别的：
和一些util工具，但它仍然像组件一样。
I agree with u on some point:
Compare JQuery with GI, I think they are not the same level:
and some util tools, but it is still like component.