(Ext.)Direct Miss

One of the biggest announcements from last month’s ExtJS Conference was the new Ext.Direct functionality in ExtJS 3.0. My criticism at the time was that there was a lot of smoke, but no fire. Almost every session mentioned it in some way or another, but they weren’t producing any enterprise-worthy server code showing how it is implemented.

Now, a month later, more details are starting to emerge, including implementations for various technologies. I sat down yesterday morning intending to take a look at the server side code in the Ext.Direct Pack; in particular the .NET and Java implementations. I was pretty disappointed with what I saw.

To understand my disappointment, you need to understand a bit of history around what Ext.Direct is attempting to do. Ext.Direct is going to be an RPC layer that exposes stub objects on the client JavaScript side that remotes the method calls to the server using JSON (or POST parameters). The protocol definition is designed to be technology-agnostic and easy to implement. In implementation, it would be the near-equivalent of DWR, except it would also run on PHP, C#, Ruby, etc…

Since I’m familiar with CORBA, RMI, SOAP and WCF, I approached Ext.Direct with a more critical eye. The biggest glaring hole in Ext.Direct is the parameter passing. Let’s take a look at a couple examples to demonstrate the problem. All the examples will assume a Java backend, and the service we’ll expose is the PersonService. I’ll work from the interface, since we don’t care about the implementation details:

public interface PersonService {



We’ll add a method to PersonService to demonstrate the simplest scenario:

public int getPersonCount();

The payload from Ext.Direct would look something like this:

{ "action":"PersonService",

This is the absolute easiest method to deal with. The operation takes no parameters, and the return value is a primitive. Ext.Direct can deal with this easily, but so could any AJAX library, so no secret sauce here.


One of the key advantages to an RPC protocol is the ability to pass Objects. Well complicate things a bit by adding the following method to the PersonService:

public Person getPerson(int id);

For our example, we’ll assume the Person class looks like this. I’m not including setters/getters to try and keep it short:

public class Person {
  private int id;
  private String name;
  private int age;
  private Date birthDate;

In the method I added above, the JSON payload from Ext.Direct stays pretty simple:

{ "action":"PersonService",

This should return the Person with the ID of 1, and depends on the server code to correctly serialize the Person object to JSON.


Now let’s make things painful. I’m going to include a method to add a Person.

public void addPerson(Person person);

This is where the wheels fly off of Ext.Direct. Since the protocol specifies the data element as an array, I’m not clear on how Ext.Direct would deal with this from the client side. Every example so far works with primitives as parameters, so I haven’t determined what it would do with a Person.

Ext.Direct would be much happier if I defined the addPerson method like this:

public void addPerson(int id, String name,int age, Date birthdate);

Then, the JSON payload would look like this:

{ "action":"PersonService",
   "data":[1,"John Doe", 25, "Sun May 01 1985 00:00:00 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time)"],

Even in this “happy path” scenario for dealing with an object, your server-side implementation would need to be able to correctly deserialize the stringified javascript date object, which is not anything the current implementations handle.

The protocol specification states that the data element can also be a JSON object with named parameters, but it is not supported in the first implementation. This is going to be absolutely critical if Ext.Direct is going to evolve into a real RPC protocol. For example, using a JSON object for the data element in the above example would result in a JSON payload like this:

{ "action":"PersonService",
   "data": {id: 1,
           name: "John Doe", 
           age: 25, 
           birthdate: "Sun May 01 1985 00:00:00 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time)"},

This would at least allow the server code a means to try and instantiate an instance of the Person object, as long as the server code is implemented in a language that allows for reflection of the Object.

My grief with Ext.Direct is that correctly implementing the server-side code to support the specification is a non-trivial endeavor. One big piece missing is the metadata. In other RPC mechanisms, there is strongly-typed metadata which can be used to create the stubs. For example, CORBA has IDL and SOAP has WSDL.

Ext.Direct is missing a metadata layer to facilitate the passing of Object values. It is going to be difficult to implement a complete server-side stack to handle the permutations that will arise. Developers will either need to dumb-down the exposed services to handle the limitations of Ext.Direct, or else they will end up doing a lot of custom work on top of the server side implementation to handle the type coercion.

I’m still not convinced Ext.Direct is the right path for ExtJS to be barking down. There are already established, tested protocols for handling RPC via JavaScript (DRW, WCF), and ExtJS already works quite well with basic AJAX over the HTTP protocol. Ext.Direct is adding a level of complexity to ExtJS which could easily turn into a rabbit hole that sucks up all their time. I would prefer they focus their precious development hours on the client library and leave the communication layers decisions to us. RPC is a complicated problem with a lot of history around it, and there is no reason for them to try and invent a new wheel in this space.

2 thoughts on “(Ext.)Direct Miss”

  1. I think Direct was a great path for 3.0, but I think it might be a while before you see widespread adoption. Over the weekend I went through the ColdFusion stack, written by Aaron Conran (The Team Lead on Ext JS, and a long time ColdFusion developer). It works, and is written well, but I wouldn’t call it ‘enterprise ready’. Then again, I don’t think that was what they were going for either. Here you have a group of developers, who write a rock star client-side framework, writing server-side examples.

    And that’s what they really are, examples. I think this is why they give us the full router guidelines, so that we, as a community, can come up with the best implementation for our particular environment. The provided stacks give us insight into what is required, after which we can adjust where we feel it’s necessary.

  2. Hi Steve. The concept of abstracting out the server communication layer via Ext.Direct is valuable, but they picked the wrong level of abstraction. Rather than specifying an RPC protocol all the way down to the server, it would have made more sense to design Ext.Direct to take client-side plugins for different server technologies. For example, rather then implement a new server-side stack for Java, they could instead plug in DWR underneath Ext.Direct and achieve their desired level of abstraction.

    Defining a new RPC protocol is only helpful for the server technologies that don’t have those stacks clearly defined (PHP, ColdFusion, etc…) The enterprise technology stacks which are the ExtJS sweetspot (Java, .NET) already have several protocol stacks for addressing this problem.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *