Erik Hatcher wrote:
On Dec 12, 2005, at 8:48 AM, Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi wrote:
As a matter of fact Tapestry *is* hard to test. But maybe I just need
to investigate a bit. And yes, it is a point of risk in my
application, that I'd like to see solved from a compilation point of
view. I just wonder how...
Compilation isn't the key though. Testing (not just unit testing) is.
As I like to re-test my 300+ pages applications for a syntax error after
a refactoring. I can use my time better, you know.
There are several listed on the left sidebar here:
http://www.rubyonrails.com/ and substantially more listed here:
http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/RealWorldUsage
Not a toy?! Awww, that's no fun. The world is our toy - let's play.
Now it gets interesting! Of course, there are a lot of Javascript
examples too, and that doesn't mean Javascript is maintainable or
reliable. But I'll concede the point. Maybe someday I'll learn RoR ;).
--
Ing. Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi
DTQ Software
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
