EAserver - PLEASE help

Author

PLEASE help

plusinf

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

Hi All!

Last week i downoladed the Getting started EAS example from codeXchange.

I'm using PB 9.0.2 (7554) EAS 5.2 and ASA 8.0.2.

I follow the example step by step and all seems to be OK! but when I try to
call my web application this IE 6.0 show me this message :
500 Servlet jspservlet: unable to service request: For input string: " File
C"
Any suggestion??
Thanks Alex!

Carson Hager

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

That's a horribly unhelpful error indicating that you simply have a syntax
error in your JSP. I'm sure if you post your JSP, someone can take a quick
look at it.

Carson

____________________
____________

Carson Hager
Cynergy Systems, Inc.
http://www.cynergysystems.com

Take PowerBuilder Applications to the Web Today with Cynergy EAF 4.0
http://www.cynergysystems.com/public/products/eaf

"plusinf" < info@plusinformatica
.com> wrote in message
news:42299508@forums
-2-dub...
> Hi All!
>
> Last week i downoladed the Getting started EAS example from codeXchange.
>
> I'm using PB 9.0.2 (7554) EAS 5.2 and ASA 8.0.2.
>
> I follow the example step by step and all seems to be OK! but when I try
> to call my web application this IE 6.0 show me this message :
> 500 Servlet jspservlet: unable to service request: For input string: "
> File C"
> Any suggestion??
> Thanks Alex!
>
>
>
>

Daniel Coppersmith

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

I love Java's error messages! Nothing better than seeing 100 lines of
useless error text for a missing semicolon!

"Carson Hager" <carson. hager@cynergysystems
.com> wrote in message
news:4229e35d@forums
-1-dub...
> That's a horribly unhelpful error indicating that you simply have a syntax
> error in your JSP. I'm sure if you post your JSP, someone can take a
quick

> look at it.
>
>
> Carson
>
> ____________________
____________
>
> Carson Hager
> Cynergy Systems, Inc.
> http://www.cynergysystems.com
>
> Take PowerBuilder Applications to the Web Today with Cynergy EAF 4.0
> http://www.cynergysystems.com/public/products/eaf
>
>
>
> "plusinf" < info@plusinformatica
.com> wrote in message
> news:42299508@forums
-2-dub...
>
>

Carson Hager

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

Don't even get me started...

____________________
____________

Carson Hager
Cynergy Systems, Inc.
http://www.cynergysystems.com

Take PowerBuilder Applications to the Web Today with Cynergy EAF 4.0
http://www.cynergysystems.com/public/products/eaf

"Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_N.0.S.P.A. M_at_InFrontSoftware
_D0T_C0M> wrote
in message news:422a03c4@forums
-1-dub...
>I love Java's error messages! Nothing better than seeing 100 lines of
> useless error text for a missing semicolon!
>
>
>
> "Carson Hager" <carson. hager@cynergysystems
.com> wrote in message
> news:4229e35d@forums
-1-dub...
> quick
>
>

Mark Maslow

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

All you should be doing in a JSP is presentation. Wrap any presentation
logic in tags, and put all your code in servlets and beans and tag libs, and
use a reasonable IDE to do real time syntax checking of your code while
you're writing it, and you never get syntax errors at runtime.

Embedding Java code inside a JSP is asking for trouble. It's not the fault
of the language that people use it inappropriately.

"Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_N.0.S.P.A. M_at_InFrontSoftware
_D0T_C0M> wrote
in message news:422a03c4@forums
-1-dub...
>I love Java's error messages! Nothing better than seeing 100 lines of
> useless error text for a missing semicolon!
>
>
>
> "Carson Hager" <carson. hager@cynergysystems
.com> wrote in message
> news:4229e35d@forums
-1-dub...
> quick
>
>

Carson Hager

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

But it is the fault of the language that it requires so many ridiculous
layers of abstraction to get a simple web page built by a mere mortal. And
please don't take this as an invitation to start another one of those Java
rants. Anyone who knows me knows I have zero religion about these things
and I have interest in an nntp Jihad one way or the other.

Carson

____________________
____________

Carson Hager
Cynergy Systems, Inc.
http://www.cynergysystems.com

Take PowerBuilder Applications to the Web Today with Cynergy EAF 4.0
http://www.cynergysystems.com/public/products/eaf

"Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
news:422a3dc5$1@foru
ms-2-dub...
> All you should be doing in a JSP is presentation. Wrap any presentation
> logic in tags, and put all your code in servlets and beans and tag libs,
> and use a reasonable IDE to do real time syntax checking of your code
> while you're writing it, and you never get syntax errors at runtime.
>
> Embedding Java code inside a JSP is asking for trouble. It's not the
> fault of the language that people use it inappropriately.
>
>
> "Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_N.0.S.P.A. M_at_InFrontSoftware
_D0T_C0M> wrote
> in message news:422a03c4@forums
-1-dub...
>
>

Mark Maslow

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

I would definately agree that if your goal is to minimize levels of
abstraction, Java would be a poor language choice.

Layers of abstraction can be quite useful however for isolating concerns and
allowing for easy plug-ability. Java is particularly strong in that there
are a lot of great (and not so great) libraries and frameworks that can be
used in many different combinations with relative ease.

Choice tends to add complexity. Is that good or bad?

I also have zero religion about these things. I'm not happy with the amount
of effort I have to expend to write a web app. I would drop Java in a
heartbeat if I saw a truly better way to create the kinds of web apps I work
on. AFAIK, the only reasonable alternative today is .NET, which sure looks
a whole lot like Java, without the wide choice of libraries and frameworks.

What technology do you recommend today for creating complex, maintainable,
conversational web apps for use by occasional, untrained users that can be
accessed using any standard browser?

"Carson Hager" <carson. hager@cynergysystems
.com> wrote in message
news:422a3e8c$1@foru
ms-1-dub...
> But it is the fault of the language that it requires so many ridiculous
> layers of abstraction to get a simple web page built by a mere mortal.
> And please don't take this as an invitation to start another one of those
> Java rants. Anyone who knows me knows I have zero religion about these
> things and I have interest in an nntp Jihad one way or the other.
>
>
> Carson
>
> ____________________
____________
>
> Carson Hager
> Cynergy Systems, Inc.
> http://www.cynergysystems.com
>
> Take PowerBuilder Applications to the Web Today with Cynergy EAF 4.0
> http://www.cynergysystems.com/public/products/eaf
>
>
>
> "Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
> news:422a3dc5$1@foru
ms-2-dub...
>
>

Dave Wolf

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

Mark Maslow wrote:
> All you should be doing in a JSP is presentation. Wrap any presentation
> logic in tags, and put all your code in servlets and beans and tag libs, and
> use a reasonable IDE to do real time syntax checking of your code while
> you're writing it, and you never get syntax errors at runtime.
>

Yeah. Now instead of very easy to find syntax errors, you get runtime
exceptions hidden behind 50 abstraction layers, 24 open source projects
you didnt write, 37 dynamically loaded classes loaded by 18 custom
classloaders.

> Embedding Java code inside a JSP is asking for trouble. It's not the fault
> of the language that people use it inappropriately.
>

Architecturally sure, but in the end, the EAS compiler error messages
blow big blue moose balls. To stick with your position that it would
have been easier to find this by doing real time syntax checking is
comparing apples to oranges. What if javac gave error messages like

"Missing literal between lines 1 and 694"

Thats basically what EAS is doing.

Pontificating about abstraction layers is hiding the core issue everyone
is brining up. EAS JSP compiler error messages stink bad.

Dave Wolf
Cynergy Systems
http://www.cynergysystems.com

>
> "Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel_N.0.S.P.A. M_at_InFrontSoftware
_D0T_C0M> wrote
> in message news:422a03c4@forums
-1-dub...
>
>
>

Dave Wolf

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

Mark Maslow wrote:
> I would definately agree that if your goal is to minimize levels of
> abstraction, Java would be a poor language choice.
>

Why? What relation do language semantics have with architectural
design? I can build two identical systems in Java with and without deep
pattern bloated abstraction, and I can create bloated abstractions in
BASIC. The two are unrelated.

> Layers of abstraction can be quite useful however for isolating concerns and
> allowing for easy plug-ability. Java is particularly strong in that there
> are a lot of great (and not so great) libraries and frameworks that can be
> used in many different combinations with relative ease.
>

Yes they can. They can also provide for undue complexity. Loosely
coupled, loosely typed, message based conversational designs also lead
to slower time to market, slower running code that is often times harder
to maintain for the person who didnt write it.

Patterns should be used like salt. Sparringly and only to accent the
flavor of the broth. Too much is easy to throw in, and in the end makes
the whole thing taste pretty bad.

> Choice tends to add complexity. Is that good or bad?
>

When your goal is delivering good software ontime and under bugdet....
BAD. IMHO.

Although I do have one new pattern I read about recently that I like a
lot. The poster called it the "Getter Done" pattern When weaved at
runtime with the "And On Time" pattern its awesome. I'm very fond of it.

> I also have zero religion about these things. I'm not happy with the amount
> of effort I have to expend to write a web app. I would drop Java in a
> heartbeat if I saw a truly better way to create the kinds of web apps I work
> on. AFAIK, the only reasonable alternative today is .NET, which sure looks
> a whole lot like Java, without the wide choice of libraries and frameworks.
>

Dont confuse language with approach. There are some pretty nice pieces
of technology by some pretty nice little companies that let you deliver
good, well built, resiliant web applications quickly and easily and
without having to have memorized the GoF.

The funny part is, in the end, the complaint here was bad compiler error
messages. Of course, if the developer had been implementing as many
patterns as possible, he wouldnt have hit the bad runtime compiler
messages. Mainly because he'd be so far behind schedule he wouldnt be
far enough along to get to JSP errors yet.

Of course, just my opinion. I think we all know what people say about
us opinionated folk. ;)

Dave Wolf
Cynergy Systems
http://www.cynergysystems.com

> What technology do you recommend today for creating complex, maintainable,
> conversational web apps for use by occasional, untrained users that can be
> accessed using any standard browser?
>
>
> "Carson Hager" <carson. hager@cynergysystems
.com> wrote in message
> news:422a3e8c$1@foru
ms-1-dub...
>
>
>

Mark Maslow

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

Dave -

I do not really disagree. I certainly agree that abstraction can be
overused, and if anyone got the impression I was advocating "implementing as
many patterns as possible", I apologize profusely.

Please enlighten us with examples of "pretty nice pieces of technology by
some pretty nice little companies that let you deliver
good, well built, resiliant web applications quickly and easily". If they
can provide the functionality and flexibility I require, I'm very
interested.

"Dave Wolf" <dave.wolf@cynergysystems.com_nospam> wrote in message
news:422bd851@forums
-1-dub...[color=darkred]
> Mark Maslow wrote:
>
> Why? What relation do language semantics have with architectural design?
> I can build two identical systems in Java with and without deep pattern
> bloated abstraction, and I can create bloated abstractions in BASIC. The
> two are unrelated.
>
>
> Yes they can. They can also provide for undue complexity. Loosely
> coupled, loosely typed, message based conversational designs also lead to
> slower time to market, slower running code that is often times harder to
> maintain for the person who didnt write it.
>
> Patterns should be used like salt. Sparringly and only to accent the
> flavor of the broth. Too much is easy to throw in, and in the end makes
> the whole thing taste pretty bad.
>
>
> When your goal is delivering good software ontime and under bugdet....
> BAD. IMHO.
>
> Although I do have one new pattern I read about recently that I like a
> lot. The poster called it the "Getter Done" pattern When weaved at
> runtime with the "And On Time" pattern its awesome. I'm very fond of it.
>
>
> Dont confuse language with approach. There are some pretty nice pieces of
> technology by some pretty nice little companies that let you deliver good,
> well built, resiliant web applications quickly and easily and without
> having to have memorized the GoF.
>
>
> The funny part is, in the end, the complaint here was bad compiler error
> messages. Of course, if the developer had been implementing as many
> patterns as possible, he wouldnt have hit the bad runtime compiler
> messages. Mainly because he'd be so far behind schedule he wouldnt be far
> enough along to get to JSP errors yet.
>
>
> Of course, just my opinion. I think we all know what people say about us
> opinionated folk. ;)
>
> Dave Wolf
> Cynergy Systems
> http://www.cynergysystems.com
>
>
>

Mark Maslow

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

> Yeah. Now instead of very easy to find syntax errors, you get runtime
> exceptions hidden behind 50 abstraction layers, 24 open source projects
> you didnt write, 37 dynamically loaded classes loaded by 18 custom
> classloaders.

Now come on - I merely suggested using a front servlet, and a standard tag
lib.

> Architecturally sure, but in the end, the EAS compiler error messages blow
> big blue moose balls. To stick with your position that it would have been
> easier to find this by doing real time syntax checking is comparing apples
> to oranges. What if javac gave error messages like
>
> "Missing literal between lines 1 and 694"
>
> Thats basically what EAS is doing.
>
> Pontificating about abstraction layers is hiding the core issue everyone
> is brining up. EAS JSP compiler error messages stink bad.

Yea, it stinks. So use use another technology altogether, or put a servlet
front end on your JSPs and you've gotten around the problem. I don't really
think of that as adding a layer of abstraction, but if you want to call it
that, I think in this case it's worth it. Certainly if you've got a
non-trivial app with dozens of JSPs.

[color=darkred]
>
> Dave Wolf
> Cynergy Systems
> http://www.cynergysystems.com
>
>

Carson Hager

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

>>
What technology do you recommend today for creating complex, maintainable,
conversational web apps for use by occasional, untrained users that can be
accessed using any standard browser?
<<

Now that's quite the subjective question....

I'll take the technology angle here as most of these decisions are driven
with a technology already in mind. If my toolkit was PowerBuilder, I would
use PB/EAServer/EAF. If my toolkit was Java, I would use ThinkCAP from
ClearNova. If my toolkit was MS, I would use ASP.NET and I would give DW.NET
a good look.

Carson

____________________
____________

Carson Hager
Cynergy Systems, Inc.
http://www.cynergysystems.com

Take PowerBuilder Applications to the Web Today with Cynergy EAF 4.0
http://www.cynergysystems.com/public/products/eaf

"Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
news:422a4c2b$1@foru
ms-1-dub...
>I would definately agree that if your goal is to minimize levels of
>abstraction, Java would be a poor language choice.
>
> Layers of abstraction can be quite useful however for isolating concerns
> and allowing for easy plug-ability. Java is particularly strong in that
> there are a lot of great (and not so great) libraries and frameworks that
> can be used in many different combinations with relative ease.
>
> Choice tends to add complexity. Is that good or bad?
>
> I also have zero religion about these things. I'm not happy with the
> amount of effort I have to expend to write a web app. I would drop Java
> in a heartbeat if I saw a truly better way to create the kinds of web apps
> I work on. AFAIK, the only reasonable alternative today is .NET, which
> sure looks a whole lot like Java, without the wide choice of libraries and
> frameworks.
>
> What technology do you recommend today for creating complex, maintainable,
> conversational web apps for use by occasional, untrained users that can be
> accessed using any standard browser?
>
>
> "Carson Hager" <carson. hager@cynergysystems
.com> wrote in message
> news:422a3e8c$1@foru
ms-1-dub...
>
>

Sponsored Links