braver wrote: > I was reading > > http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000545.html > > and it has an emphasis on Ruby's "beauty", and parsimony, as > demonstrated by the code excerpt (David: "I was more surprised to learn > that someone would actually prefer something like"): > > class Project(meta.Model): > project_manager = meta.ForeignKey(ProjectManager) > milestones = meta.OneToOneField(Milestone) > categories = meta.ManyToManyField(Category) > > p = projects.get_object(id__exact=1) > pp = projects.get_list > > ...over: > > class Person < ActiveRecord::Base > belongs_to :project_manager > has_many :milestones > has_and_belongs_to_many :categories > end > > p = Project.find(1) > pp = Project.find(:all) > > Then there's a whole presentation linked from that blog entry, in PDF > at > > http://media.rubyonrails.org/presentations/pursuitofbeauty.pdf > > -- which seems to elaborate on ruby/ror beauty (implied over > python/django).
"If surgeons were like programmers, they'd leave the patient to bleed out in order to have a really satisfying argument over the merits of two different kinds of tourniquet." http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2003/08/12#a1186 cheers Bill
