More good nuggets from ruby.mn Jonathan Dahl writes:
One point that I didn't notice in your email: configuration vs.
convention. Rails makes a conscious choice to support convention
over configuration, and this is a major part of the Rails "flavor".
There are no XML configuration files
Tom Brice of ruby.mn informs me that Ruby's default "ERB" templating
approach, in which the templates are fully executable code, is not
the only approach:
Rails does not have to use the erb templates. There are options
they are just not shipped with rails try these links:
http://redhanded.
I thought it would be appropriate in the thread to repost my old post.
>>>
There is also pretty long discussion regarding RoR on
TSS:
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=37121
Let me post here few excerpts from the discussion:
+
Bruce Tate : For at lea
Excellent post Paul!
I would like to add on the topic of Java being boring and Ruby is all about
fun:
- It really depends on somebody's goals â if somebody's focus on the process
of creating an application then then Ruby is a winner ( or any toy for that
matter);
-
Agreed. Nicely said.
E
- Original Message
From: Darío Vasconcelos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tapestry users
Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2006 8:34:10 AM
Subject: Re: Ruby vs Tapestry
Excellent post Paul! Very well balanced, sticks to facts, hits a lot
of important points... maybe you
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 11:25 AM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Ruby vs Tapestry
Interesting discussion, but I don't think anybody has hit on the
really important stuff yet. Those more knowledgable can correct me if
I'm wrong:
*** Rails is based on a dynamically typed languag
Excellent post Paul! Very well balanced, sticks to facts, hits a lot
of important points... maybe you should convert it into a blog/wiki
entry, I think it would be helpful to a lot of people...
Dario
On 3/7/06, Paul Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interesting discussion, but I don't think a
Interesting discussion, but I don't think anybody has hit on the
really important stuff yet. Those more knowledgable can correct me if
I'm wrong:
*** Rails is based on a dynamically typed language (Ruby), Tapestry
on a statically typed one (Java) with a dynamically typed template
languag
Then again, trails (Tapestry on rails) is getting more and more features
each month (if you're using subversion checkout)
https://trails.dev.java.net/
Cheers,
PS
On 3/7/06, Craig Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > There is of course also Groovy to look at. I've used Ruby and
> > Groovy and G
There is of course also Groovy to look at. I've used Ruby and
Groovy and Groovy seems to be a bit better (well, at least in terms
of what libraries are available, you can use the standard Java API
for example and as a result any other Java library)
Groovy looks cool because it has closures,
Woops :)
Also to add to the discussion is Grails (Groovy on Rails)
Gary Pampara wrote:
There is of course also Groovy to look at. I've used Ruby and Groovy and
Groovy seems to be a bit better (well, at least in terms of what
libraries are available, you can use the standard Java API for examp
There is of course also Groovy to look at. I've used Ruby and Groovy and
Groovy seems to be a bit better (well, at least in terms of what
libraries are available, you can use the standard Java API for example
and as a result any other Java library)
Performance is also a bit better than ruby.
Hi,
I am not a Ruby expert but have messed about it with it, and with RoR.
Ruby doesnt seem to be enterprise ready. There are sites like
Basecamp, etc., which handle an enterprise load, certainly. On the
other hand, there are Ruby libraries like rexml which simply don't
seem to perform.
I think your question should be adjusted:
Ruby on Rails vs. Tapestry
Tapestry without Java is nothing. Much like Ruby by itself is not
going to help you with your web project.
On 3/6/06, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can't really compare them. Ruby is a programming language, Ta
You can't really compare them. Ruby is a programming language, Tapestry is a
java web application framework. The idiosyncracies between languages alone
limit the ability to draw any useful comparisons.
The only general argument I can think of is that "java" has a lot more
robust enterprise sort of
15 matches
Mail list logo
