On Mar 8, 2:08 am, "Russell E. Owen" <ro...@uw.edu> wrote: > In article > <3d9fe0b2-7931-4ab6-8929-235460729...@q9g2000pbf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > > > rusi <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mar 6, 11:03 pm, Jason Hsu <jhsu802...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm currently in the process of learning Ruby on Rails. I'm going through > > > the Rails for Zombies tutorial, and I'm seeing the power of Rails. > > > > I still need to get a Ruby on Rails site up and running for the world to > > > see. (My first serious RoR site will profile mutual funds from a value > > > investor's point of view.) > > > > I have an existing web site and project called Doppler Value Investing > > > (dopplervalueinvesting.com) that uses Drupal to display the web pages and > > > Python web-scraping scripts to create *.csv and *.html files showing > > > information on individual stocks. My site has a tacked-on feel to it, and > > > I definitely want to change the setup. > > > > At a future time, I will rebuild my Doppler Value Investing web site in > > > either Ruby on Rails or Django. The Ruby on Rails route will require > > > rewriting my Python script in Ruby. The Django route will require > > > learning > > > Django. (I'm not sure which one will be easier.) > > > > My questions: > > > 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? > > > "Where there is choice there is no freedom" > >http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1954/1954-03-03-jiddu-krishnamur... > > blic-talk > > > Python-for-web offered so much choice -- zope, django, turbogears, > > cherrypy, web.py etc etc -- that the newbie was completely drowned. > > With Ruby there is only one choice to make -- choose Ruby and rails > > follows. > > > Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software > > -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much > > spurious choice. > > > GvR understood and rigorously implemented a dictum that Nicklaus Wirth > > formulated decades ago -- "The most important thing about language > > design is what to leave out." Therefore Python is a beautiful > > language. Unfortunately the same leadership did not carry over to web > > frameworks and so we have a mess. > > > I guess the situation is being corrected with google putting its > > artillery behind django. > > I strongly agree. The fact that there is no de-facto standard web system > for Python is a major problem. Consider: > - With too many choice one has no idea which projects will be maintained > and which will be abandoned. > - Expert knowledge among users is spread more thinly. > - The effort of contributors is diluted. > > Years ago when I had some simple web programming to do I looked at the > choices, gave up and used PHP (which I hated, but got the job done). If > RoR had been available I would have been much happier using that. > > In my opinion the plethora of Python web frameworks is a serious > detriment to trust and wider acceptance of Python for this use. If > Django is becoming this standard, that is excellent news. > > Some choice is good, but in my opinion too much choice and lack of a > de-facto standard are very detrimental. > > -- Russell
Hmm… I am not sure I agree with your agreement :-) Its not so much "some choice" vs "too much choice" as "real choice" vs "spurious choice". Python or C or Haskell is a real choice. Python or Ruby is a spurious choice. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list