On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Modulok <modu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi everyone, > > few months back I decided to adopt python for my all sort of work > including > > web programming... > > -- > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > > > > Pick Django or web2py. You'll be happy with either. (I have no experience > with > zope.) > > They're both full featured do-everything-you-ever-wanted frameworks with > great > communities and lots of documentation. You can buy books on either. I'd say > web2py is a little more elegant and easier to get started with. (An > admittedly > subjective claim.) Django has a little larger community and has more third > party stuff. > > If you just need to "get it done" and don't care about how it happens, > they're > both excellent. You'll meet deadlines with either of them. The communities > are > smart the docs are great. You can't really go wrong any way you slice it. > There's more third party documentation and books for Django right now but > that's just because Django came out first. Give it another couple years and > there won't be much difference. > > Basically, flip a coin and just go with it. > > > > And now for the gritty details approach... > > The problem with web frameworks is they are "magic", i.e. things just > happen. > It's the price we pay for using a high level abstraction. The higher the > abstraction the more magic there is. Often times magic is good. It saves us > time and money. However depending on your needs, other options are worth > considering. > > If you are willing to invest a lot of time not being initially productive > but > learn a *ton* in exchange, you can use something like cherrypy. (Don't get > me > wrong, I love and often use cherrypy.) It's dirt simple and works. However, > because it's so simple it doesn't do half of what you need for a > non-trivial > production site. Result? You'll have to fill in the tool chain gaps with > other > modules. This is what web frameworks do for you. > > If you go the cherrypy route you'll need to learn other things like like > markup > languages and some kind of way to talk to a database. Security is also > entirely > in your hands. You'll learn a ton about HTTP, SQL, markup languages, web > security, encryption, etc. You'll be basically re-creating a web framework > of > your own brand. Again it's a time spent vs. knowledge gained trade off. > > For a template language I really liked wheezy.template but it's a little > too > new for me to feel comfortable using it on any big project. It has a very > simple inheritance model, which is refreshing. I hope to use it more in the > future. > > I usually use Mako for my templates. By 'template' I mean any template, not > just HTML. I use mako for HTML, documentation, I even use mako to write SQL > templates. The inheritance model of Mako takes a little more mental > gymnastics > to wrap your head around than the simpler (read nicer) wheezy.template > model, > but it's a more mature code base. (Not as mature as cheetah.) I had only > minor > experience with cheetah but found I preferred Mako. It was a matter of > taste. > There's nothing wrong with cheetah. > > As for database access: sqlalchemy is truly excellent and very flexible. > For > most things sqlalchemy is great. However for some projects it may contain > too > much magic. (Again we're going deeper.) Sometimes a backend-specific > module is > called for, in which case psycopg2 on postgresql is nice. The ability to > use > python context managers as transaction blocks is very clean. > > In short, how much do you want to learn? Do you prefer a top-down or > bottom-up > approach? Gritty details or elegant abstractions? > > -Modulok- > thanks a lot Rusi, Roy Smith, Surya and Modulok I am sticking to django. In future I will touch web2py also
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
