On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Adam Boas <adam.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The real nub is defining what 'better' would mean. > Simplest? Most Re-usable? Easiest to maintain? Least amount of effort? > All of the above! I'm collecting ideas. I'd like to know how others have tackled this problem. These days responsive forms are expected - hence, I assume that we're moving closer to a shared understanding of the right and wrong ways to do it. I tend to lean toward the simplest solution I can manage, particularly on > pre-existing, large apps. If you already have controllers shipping HTML > there is nothing wrong with leveraging that and sprinkling a little AJAX > pixie dust to make the app seem more responsive. To me the only absolute is > to keep the pixie dust out of the templates and make it clean and readable. > We do, but they're doing it poorly and the cracks are showing. There's confusing between actions that return snippets, actions that return pages, and actions that check request.xhr? to do both (ugh). Often if an error occurs it's not communicated well. Validation is .. ignored, or the error message is garbled. > I personally really like Backbone for building an app with significant > rich client behaviour, but would never introduce it to an existing full > page post application just to get a little bit of responsive behaviour in > some forms. It introduces significant complexity that just doesn't make any > sense for the kind of thing you have mentioned. And if you are not routing > or changing views, and have no significant model(s) it really adds very > little value. > I'd considered backbone, but only because it's on my should-learn list. Thanks for that information. > Angular is a framework I have been playing with a bit recently and it does > seem to offer a nice, lighter weight alternative to just writing Jquery > plugins for this kind of thing. Its binding behaviour can make responding > to your posts nice and simple. I can definitely recommend having a bit of a > look at if as an alternative, particularly if you want to play with the new > shiny :-) > I'd given this a brief skim a month or so ago. Revisiting, it looks like it might be worth a proper try, although it's substantially different from the way we're doing things now. -- Michael Pearson -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to rails-oceania@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rails-oceania+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
