More of my 2 cents :) > Rails is easy because, it would appear, it > sacrifices TMTOWTDI - they lost me right there. >
Yup. And from a technical standpoint, rails isn't all that good. ActiveRecord? Great for blogs and Basecamp, bad for everything else. Even my boss picked up on this immediately! (And thinks Catalyst is similarly afflicted -- I guess I'll have to write a demo app to prove them wrong :) I do admit that saying "ActiveRecord" feels really good. Much better than DBIx::Class::Schema ;) Ruby has some neat features, but hello, it's 2006 and Unicode doesn't work!? That's just sloppy, really. And then there are "Ruby gems", but they're Just Not CPAN. (Think about all the infrastructure that CPAN gives you -- local mirrors, CPAN testers, rt.cpan.org, mailing lists, etc. Does the Comprehensive Ruby Archive Network have that? :) Obviously I've had the "perl kool-ade" so to speak, but Catalyst + CPAN is definitely the simplest and most elegant framework. It makes your work easier, not harder! But since it doesn't do automagic AJAX + OS X icons (oooh preeety....), it's not going to be "popular". Downloading Catalyst::Plugin::Prototype is much too difficult, I guess. However, I think Catalyst is popular enough, because we have plenty of people working on it, and plenty of people on the mailing list willing to help others out. (Dunno if the same can be said for Ruby + Rails. Is there anything like p5p for ruby? Do more than 2 people work on Rails?) > I'd rather have the design decisions for my chosen framework made in > consideration of the pragmatic than the marketing side of things. I think everyone on the list agrees. That's why we're here :) Regards, Jonathan Rockway
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
