http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2006/8/7/ruby-on-rails-will-ship-with-
os-x-10-5-leopard
This is NOT meant as a criticism, Fusebox is tremendous (well, at
least Active 4D's implementation, I haven't used it outside that
environment), but RoR is getting all of the press, its developer
community is (at least publicly) growing very rapidly, etc., etc.
while Fusebox seems to have a small, rather static following mainly
amongst Cold Fusion developers (whose code we can not use directly).
As more RoR code snippets, examples, even whole site templates become
available, I ask, "Are we missing the boat?"
I do wonder if having an RoR enabled A4D, along with the promised SQL
engine in 4D 2007, would allow for more access to available code
libraries, or not as now with Cold Fusion Fusebox code?
We don't need to chase every new fad language and methodology that
comes along, but RoR does not seem to be a fad nor does it seem to be
fading anytime soon. Fusebox *appears* to being passed by.
I do NOT know how challenging it would be for A4D to implement RoR.
Yes, I'm willing to pay Aparajita to implement RoR for A4D v5, but
not the entire bill.
I'm asking, mainly Aparajita; this spring when Leopard comes out with
RoR included, when 4D 2007 comes out with a built in SQL engine, will
Fusebox still be our best choice?
--
Bart Alcorn
National Service Center
800-500-6421 x 2360
AIM/iChat: balcornnsc
_______________________________________________
Active4D-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.aparajitaworld.com/mailman/listinfo/active4d-dev
Archives: http://mailman.aparajitaworld.com/archive/active4d-dev/
