Most of the people I've seen using rails in the past are moving to node or scala because of scalability issues where rails just couldn't handle the load. That's not an endorsement and is literally just andecdotal since I've never seen anything myself that ruby couldn't handle. But still I figured I'd put it out there. This article is a rather interesting read. http://www.infoworld.com/t/javascript/nodejs-keeps-stealing-rails-thunder-232281
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Mike Moore <blowm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Barry Roberts <b...@robertsr.us> wrote: > > > > I looked at RoR a long time ago when it was all the hotness. So my > > opinion may be outdated, but here it is: RoR is really good at making > > simple CRUD web apps that are backed by a database. But if you want > > to go much beyond field-based editing of records in web forms, it gets > > painful in a hurry. It makes the easy things easy, and the hard > > things much harder. Again, just my (possibly outdated) opinion. > > > As someone who has been doing web programming since 1996 and using > rails since 2005, I would like to respectfully disagree. I don't find > much in rails that makes hard things hard. It has a great deal of > modularity and you can replace simple things with complex things when > needed. FWIW. > > /* > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > Don't fear the penguin. > */ > /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
