On Dec 8, 2005, at 4:09 PM, Konstantin Ignatyev wrote:
Personally I see no reasons to worry about RoR yet.
No worries at all, you're right. I'm building the front-end of my
main project in RoR, and love it.
I love the Ruby language, and RoR is a great DSL on top of Ruby.
Tapestry has things that RoR does not, primarily encapsulated
components that embrace JavaScript and images in a single unit.
Pragmatically, however, RoR is incredibly productive and fun.
By the way Neal sees RoR as a kind
of DSL implementation, which is a bit different from
seemingly prevailing view of RoR as a library/wizard
type approach.
RoR is a web application framework. Architecturally it is most
comparable to Struts/WebWork in terms of controllers/actions/views.
It is a DSL as well. In a controller I can do this:
class MyController < ApplicationController
before_filter :authorize
def action
# protected action, requires login
end
private
def authorize
# save off current URI for redirecting after login too...
redirect_to(:controller => "authorize", :action => "login")
end
end
"before_filter" being the DSL part of the equation here (as well as
"redirect_to"). Ruby's expressiveness allows the language syntax
itself to fade into the background for the most part and for you to
express your code in the "language" that makes the most sense.
RoR is here and now, and very effective at what it's designed for.
I'm using it, and very happy with it. Is it perfect? No. But it
lets me get the job done cleanly and mostly importantly, with enjoyment.
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
