yea it did look like notepad , but it was generating code , files ,
directories on the fly .


Konstantin i personally can't see the link yahoo won't let me
On 12/8/05, Patrick Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>        There's an IDE for rails now? What's it called? Last time I looked
> at it I was programming in a glorified version of notepad. (and I think
> somebody mentioned there's an eclipse plugin now).
>
>        --- Pat
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cosmin Bucur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:32 PM
> > To: Tapestry users
> > Subject: Re: tapestry to JSF conversion
> >
> > 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]
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]

Reply via email to