I am trying to integrate spring-mvc and reactjs, but it's too poor example, but I like flux architect of reactjs so that i strongly want to integrate reactjs with springmvc!
I want to use reactjs as a client side, springmvc as a rest backend. Can you provide me some example or tutorial to do this? I've searched on google but it's very poor result. Please help me.
Thanks you very much
This answer might not be what you want, but I would advise you not to integrate the two of them. If they communicate over HTTP/WebSockets, they are already decoupled, and it might just cause you pain to couple them.
Advantages of decoupling the frontend and backend into separate projects:
People with experience only in React or Spring can contribute without getting confused by the other stuff.
The tooling/build you need for a Spring project is quite different from what you need for a frontend project, and mixing this into one code base can get pretty confusing.
If they're decoupled from the start, it gets easier to add other clients that use the backend API. By having them as separate projects, you're less likely to develop the backend in a way that's very tied to the frontend.
The frontend and the backend should use different versions and be shippable independently of each other. What if the backend team is currently doing a major refactoring, but the frontend team just fixed a critical bug and wants to ship a new release?
As soon as you add asset caching to your frontend project (like putting the files on a CDN, using the HTML5 application cache or the new Service Worker API), you have to prepared for getting requests to your backend from "old" clients. By separating them, it's easier to think about and plan for stuff like that on the backend.
I could probably list a couple of more benefits, but these are the ones I consider has the largest impact. There are of course some benefits of integrating the two of them, but those tend to get smaller and smaller as the project grows/matures.
Related
After coding for a couple of years, I have implemented many different software services into applications I was coding, using API documentation that software owner has provided. And I thought that was all about APIs I need to know, that it's just a way to make to software services communicate with each other.
But now I got a task to create an application, I wont go into detail, but let's say it just needs to implement CRUD operations and that it should use Vue on front and Laravel on back. And in the explanation of a task it is mentioned that I should use REST API for triggering those operations. And that's the part that confuses me!
Since I have never created an application from scratch, I was only working on already stable applications, fixing bugs and implementing new functionalities (and I guess this is the what it looks like for the most of the people who work in big companies today), and that's why I thought that those two frameworks (Vue and Laravel) have already implemented REST APIs since they can communicate between themselves.
Why am I specifically asked to use REST API to trigger those operations? Is there any way other than using an API to make front communicate with back (even I am using frameworks already)? If not, do they want me to create my REST API for communication and not use the one that is already provided by frameworks? I am confused, why did they mention to use REST API as if it wasn't default option, something that shouldn't even even be questionable, just an expected behavior.
why did they mention to use REST API as if it wasn't default option
For many years, offering an API in the backend for JS frontend consumption was not the default option. Traditional "round trip" applications use a form that submits to the server with a full page refresh, and I'd hazard a guess that most web applications live today still work like that.
With the advent of Vue, React, Angular etc, there is an expectation that fetching data and sending data is done via APIs in an AJAX operation. This gives applications a more seamless feel, and they're faster, since only a relatively small amount of data needs to be sent or received.
In small Laravel/Vue applications, the frontend and backend are often in the same repo, and are deployed together as a single unit. However, as the size and complexity of an application increases, there is value in splitting up these pieces into microservices, which can be deployed separately, without tricky system dependencies complicating the deployment pipeline and sign-off process. Using an API lends itself well to that approach.
Indeed, as the backend increases, the API is not one service, but several, split by process area (e.g. user, sign-up, checkout, dashboard, etc).
Do Laravel and Vue always use ... APIs to communicate?
So, to answer your main question, you don't have to use APIs/AJAX with Vue and Laravel. You can still use standard HTTP forms and redraw the whole screen if you want.
Do Laravel and Vue always use RESTful APIs to communicate? [my emphasis]
Another way of interpreting the question is that perhaps you have received instructions from someone who was differentiating a REST API from a different kind of API. On the web, GraphQL is becoming more popular. Server-to-server, SOAP (XML) used to be very common, and is still in use in many enterprises.
FOA, The gap is not going to fill "ASAP" because it requires domain knowledge that you are missing. And yes RESTful API is the best way unless you want multi-dimensional communication across multiple platforms.
There is a project that is built using JSF with Spring Integration.
See https://www.tutorialspoint.com/jsf/jsf_spring_integration.htm to get an idea.
JSP is used for the html templates. Managed beans (part of JSF) make use of Spring beans as a managed property, which in turn drive business logic. The goal is to rip apart this project and split it into a RESTful service and Angular front end.
What is the best way to do this without re-writing everything. Which components can I get rid of, and which components can be re-used? If I use Spring Boot for building the REST API, can I re-use the Spring beans?
Edit: I am new to most of these technologies.
Exposing your domain model through REST should be relatively straight forward using Spring/JPA, whatever. You should learn about DTOs and especially as it relates to problems about "Lazy Initialization" under Hibernate/JPA/Spring Data, etc.
Secondarily understand the concept of views into the domain model. E.g., shipping looks at the database differently than marketing. Same database, different "facades" or business layers with different set of DTOs.
Conceptually, reproducing a JSF front end in Angular is something that is both "the same thing" and "completely different" at the same time. The key difference, IMHO, will be the JavaScript concepts and paradigms underlying Angular/React/Vue or whatever you want to use on the Front End.
Consider that an AngularJS/React/Vue front end might be better off running on top of node.js in a separate container or server, and might have different databases that it accesses on its own such as loyalty points or currency conversion, etc. Don't be afraid to let the frontend folks "be" the application instead of the backend folks. On the backend, try not to lose information. For example, if a customer adds 3 items, then changes 1, then places the order, that's 3 separate pieces of information, not 1 order. This is important for business analytics and customer service, which are business facing services as opposed to client facing services.
As a Java developer I tend to feel Angular/JS developers do a completely different and non-overlapping job than me. I feel the same way towards HTML/CSS folks. As such, I don't recommend you try being both, you will stretch yourself too thin. However, a good working knowledge on a smaller project, such as you are suggesting, is certainly useful.
Welcome to SO. Your post will probably be closed/ignored for being to broad, etc. Very specific questions and answers are what this site is about. GL.
I want to merge serveral frontend parts of different microservices together to an whole website. My idea behind this was to have a frontend, backend and database part in each microservice.
I already familiar with microservices but I never used them to create a website, especially the frontend part.
Are there any articles about that or something like tutorials or maybe someone at stackoverflow can explain me more in depth how or with which "tool" I could put the microservices together.
I understand what you want to do but in essence that's not what microservices are about as far as I understand. It's the service bit in the name that makes a difference. When you assemble a front end, a backend and a db together you're more or less building a complete application. You gain much more freedom in changing the UI by decoupling it.
Lars
I'm going to build my first REST app via Laravel and a client side framework which I'm not sure yet (probably React or Vue.js).
I did some research about how should I build my app, and unfortunately it got me even more confused.
I've come to a conclusion that I can build my app in 2 ways:
Build the app in the same project. However, without Laravel Blade.
Separate the App to 2 projects (Front and Back).
On the one hand, the pros of building the app on the same project:
Grants me the option to use Laravel Mix.
Laravel offers out of the box Vue support.
On the other hand, the pros of building the app separated from Front to Back:
Each side has its own single responsibility and can be refactored easily.
As I heard it from my friends, it's more convenient (even tho for me it sounds too complex).
I wanted to know what is the most popular way to build a RESTful app when Laravel is being part of it. Is there another way of what I mentioned?
Personally,
I like to keep them apart because it's easier to maintain. Yes, you have to keep track of 2 different projects/folders/repositories but they are pieces of the same cake.
Scaffolding an API in Laravel is very easy and simple. I assume you already know how to do that. You are worried about loosing the advantages offered by Laravel Mix, but believe me you are loosing nothing.
Since your preference is on Angular, just clone any seed project repository with everything setup. e.g:
1. AngularJS: https://github.com/angular/angular-seed
2. Angular 2: https://github.com/mgechev/angular-seed
As you can see, these seed projects already have all the build tools you need and now things seem actually easier. That's what frameworks are made for.
Now imagine later you want to add a mobile app to the stack. You don't even need to change a single thing. Your API already runs independently of the frontend and vice versa.
Question is opinion based... So here is my opinionated answer.
TLDR: For speed of development and arguably more satisfaction, build as one project. Don't overcomplicate unnecessarily too early. When project gets big enough, and starts to generate you some money, then think about splitting the projects - you will know when it is time.
The Laravel Ecosystem is just great for small, medium and even large applications.
Laravel gives you a resources folder, where you can put all your Javascript & front-end assets. You have Envoy to deploy your application and write your deployment scripts. You have mix to build your assets. You don't have to use mix - you could write your own gulp/webpack/grunt etc...
By keeping together as one project, you are able to use the same IDE project for both front-end and backend work, yet keep separation of concerns because all backend code is completely separated from front-end code. You can tweak the payloads being sent from angular, and tweak how the payloads are handled in PHP api nice and easy so you only need 1 ide and one browser and a terminal client.
The nicest thing about keeping the project together, is that assuming you are using VCS (git) and you really should be, then your front and back-end will always be in-sync with each other. Otherwise, you need to manage & coordinate deployments of your front-end and backend code.
When your application gets big enough, it won't take long to separate the projects as the frontend and backend should be already extremely loosely coupled.
Just think of all the added layers of complexity that you are introducing to your application. When you deploy a change to your REST API, you will probably need to also deploy a change to your angular application. What version of the angular app is compatible with what version of the API? If you have a team of devs, working on specific projects, then this complexity pays off - but most teams have processes in place to manage, synchronise & automate deployments.
I think you should go with 2 projects. I would.
I will give an example using complexity rate of growth. It is just from my own experience. (X means amount of features, Y means how complex they are to implement)
With a single project, it is super simple at first. No communication with the server, no hard stuff, everything is tangled. Then nearing the end, it starts to get harder and harder to create more features/pages because everything is tangled.
Or as a function:
But if you start with 2 projects, sure, it will be harder at first (communication, synchronisation, whatever) but the rate of growth for complexity will not be as high. Everything has it's own responsibility, everything does what it needs to do. Tests are simpler, expansion is simpler, refactoring is simpler, and you can complete the project with ease.
Or as a function:
Clearly, from the graphs above, you can infer that the rate of growth for a single project is much slower. (And of course, not actual numbers, I did not measure anything or tracked such projects, this is just out of my own experience)
We are about to embark on a new project development which is basically a Back-office application.
We chose the following technologies in our backend:
Spring, JPA, mySQL , MongoDB, RabbitMQ..
We chose to use GWT as our frontend framework.
My question is very simple:
Should we create one project, that comprises both the backend and frontend?
OR:
Should we create 2 separate project, one will be a pure backend project while the other pure frontend?
EDIT - we are a team of 4 developers each should get his hands dirty in an end-to-end development. i.e everyone in the team should code features from client to server.
It depends on different parameters, like final size of the project, number of team members, etc.
But in general I'd rather split projects in maven modules, because it allows a better client/server sides separation, it facilitates testing, and it's more convenient when you have people in the project focused in one side.
If you go ahead with this setup, I suggest to take a look to Tomas Broyer's archetypes
[EDITED]
Knowing that you are a team of 4 people and you are going to work for 8 months, I definitively will go with a multi-module maven project (server, shared, client).
For simplicity's sake, I would break it up in a pure frontend project and a pure backend project. The workload will be slightly more since you have to write a messaging service inbetween, but longterm, you can reuse that backend for other frontends / services.
Since you're going to use RabbitMQ for messaging, you might as well have them separate and when the load gets heavy, you just plug in another frontend instance or when the backend starts to suffer, startup another backend or when the queue suffers, startup another instance of RabbitMQ.
For the frontend project I would use something like XMLRPC, your GWT code will then communicate via XMLRPC with your Java code and voila, you can test the endpoints right there, develop by just plugging in dummy data right there and work on the frontend even without the presence of a database or queue system. This also allows you to start both projects at the same time.
So basically from a point of plug-ability and ease of testing and since you're planning to use RabbitMQ, two separate projects, if there was only one project containing both the frontend and the backend, then there would be no/little need for RabbitMQ and for every frontend you're starting up, you'd be starting up another backend which might be a waste of memory.