So in summary we are saying that a well stocked toolbox results in the job being done well, provided the toolbox matches the job, and that this fosters uptake. Depth is required for longevity however.
On Mar 22, 3:28 pm, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 22, 3:44 pm, phil swenson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I think what Fantom (or any other language trying to gain traction) needs is > > a really good full stack web framework. Before Rails, Ruby was very > > obscure. > > Hmm it's true that Ruby got a boost due to Rails, but I am not sure > you can generalize like that. Rails unique use of generators and > conventions is a result of dynamic typing and very (too?) flexible > syntax. And looking around it seems as if RoR caters to a certain > niche of greenfield/grassroot development and its adoption has peeked > [http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/paperinfo/tpci/Ruby.html]. > > > So my advice to the Scala, Fantom, Mirah, etc world would be: copy Rails. > > That's what Groovy did and Groovy has definitely gained traction. > > And when I say copy Rails - I mean the whole stack. So by whole stack I > > mean: build/automation framework, database framework, interactive command > > line console, database migrations, easy configuration, set directory > > structure, dev/test/production modes, built in testing framework. > > Odd that you mention Mirah in this context, given that its design goal > is to cater to no runtime library whatsoever. > > > Even Java doesn't have such a stack. > > No because your listed criteria would require a benevolent dictator. > In fact, it sounds an awful lot like the Microsoft world. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
