> Show me how to build Digg with Ruby on Rails and I will believe that > RoR is better than a PHP-backed solution. There, I said it.
I certainly agree with that sentiment (hence, why I built the site with CakePHP in the first place). I've read all of "The David's" presentations (and books) on RoR and tend to agree with all of the *design* decisions, but don't care particularly for the implementation -- well, I don't care for Ruby all that much. Honestly, I spend *most* of my time working in the curly-bracket language world (AS3, C#, C++) and while I can pretty fluently read Ruby, jumping back and forth between writing it and the others is just an unnecessary overhead. Plus, PHP is a defacto web development standard. I can go anywhere and safely expect a LAMP backend on a server. Sure, I can find Rails when/if I need it without much of a problem, but LAMP is universal. It reminds me of my AI professor in college who always espoused the virtues of Scheme... my computer science self could appreciate the elegance, but my pragmatic self would simply moan and roll his eyes. I take the Rails community as a source of *inspiration* for my work in MVC (with both CakePHP and AS3/Flex), but have decided to skip on their implementation for now. So, it sounds like I should switch the dev-line over to CakePHP 1.2. I know the Manual on cakephp.org is aimed at CakePHP 1.1... is there a similar doc for CakePHP 1.2 that I could munch on? Troy. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake PHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
