I nevevr tried coding rails ... but i did watch some of the demos and it looks promising , at the same time restrictive . Not sure about ruby as a language .
I think however that what Ruby on Rails has is a great IDE . I mean we have all of that stuff arrond tapestry , and a whole lot more . But there are no such ide's that help with automating tasks that much . Creating files for you when you declare them , creating blank methods , templates ... IDEA can do some of this with some configuration . Eclipse can do some of this with more configuration . But still nothing out of the box ... I think that's the only real plus . I wouldn't even have looked at it , but I recently read beyond java by Bruce Tate whom ussualy is a great reference for lightweight java stuff . And he was praising ruby on rails . Anywais glad i brought it up with you guys , since there is a lot more collective knowledge here On 12/8/05, Gentry, Michael (Contractor) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, you wouldn't want to de-Rail the discussion, after all ... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cosmin Bucur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 3:16 PM > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: tapestry to JSF conversion > > > you know ... to throw the discusion COMPLETLY offtopic now > > On 12/8/05, Cosmin Bucur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > since we're discussing efficient development with .net , i thought i'd > > shoot the question ummm .... > > > > what do you guys think of Ruby on Rails ? > > > > On 12/8/05, Patrick Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Please see comments below :). > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:01 PM > > > > To: Tapestry users > > > > Subject: Re: tapestry to JSF conversion > > > > > > > > Well actually you can download Java and buy MyEclipse for $30. > > > > > > > > Now you actually have a point... but the problem is, what happens > when > > > > it just doesn't work? When you pop in the .NET CDs, start > developing, > > > > and notice you don't have good internationalization, that your > pages > > > > suck at web standards (yeah, those BGCOLOR properties in Visual > Studio > > > > are just *great*!) and that if you want a little bit from the "way > they > > > > do it" (i'm not saying "the right way to do it" because it's NOT > the > > > > right way!) you can't do nothing. Ahh... if you want to see the > source > > > > code because the documentation's lacking ? > > > > > > I agree about 80% with what you have to say; I find > programming in > > > .net to be sort of like using public transport. It gets me 80% of > the way > > > there very efficiently, but then I'm ****** and have to walk the > last half > > > mile through the rain. .NET definitely has a ".net" way of doing > things and > > > god help you if you want to stray from the path. > > > If you're willing to live within those restrictions though, > it > > > works. I've yet to run into something I flat *couldn't* do with > .net. It was > > > usually more that I couldn't do it the way I wanted to do it and the > .net > > > way was very microsofty and weird. That's a question of taste > through rather > > > than functionality in my book. > > > Also, (and I can't vouch for this personally because I was > never a > > > VB jockey), my suspicion is that a lot of the .NETism that you and I > think > > > are just f-ing wonkers, and probably familiar VB paradigms that make > perfect > > > sense to folks who have a MS background. > > > > > > > > > > > What I value most of the Java community is your chance to actually > make > > > > a difference in what you need and what's the best way of doing > things > > > > (well in almost every project but the > dictatorial-managed-Hibernate > > > > one). It's the "open source" part what I like the most - not quite > the > > > > technology, which I find lacking in some areas. > > > > > > I enjoy that as well, but I can't claim it's a business > reason to > > > recommend an OS stack. "Hey boss, can we use java and tapestry > instead of > > > .net because I'll get a kick out of working on tapestry and, who > knows, I > > > might be able to contribute some code back to the commuity." > > > > > > "It'll let me develop faster" is a business case. > > > "It'll let me develop less buggy code" is a business case. > > > "It's backed by the world's largest software company and > we'll > > > always have somebody to call if it breaks" is a business case. > > > "It'll run 3X as fast" may, or may not, be a business case. > > > > > > "I like playing with open source" is not, unfortunately, a > business > > > case :). > > > > > > --- Pat > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
