On 6/21/06, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Jun 21, 2006, at 12:35 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
> "lowercase" web services?  What do you use to talk XML on the RoR
> side?   One of the Ruby SOAP implementations, something homegrown, or
> something else?

I'm currently using REXML to parse the responses, and its working
fine.  But I think REXML's performance is not quite as quick as
perhaps sending back YAML or even Ruby code to eval.  Solr has a
custom response handler hook so XML is not required, just the default.

By "lowercase" web services I mean it's a service, and it's on the
web, but it's not heavy SOAP.

Cool.  I checked out the REXML page.  This quote is great:

"Some of the common differences are that the Ruby API relies on block
enumerations, rather than iterators. For example, the Java code:

for (Enumeration e=parent.getChildren(); e.hasMoreElements(); ) {
 Element child = (Element)e.nextElement(); // Do something with child

in Ruby becomes:

parent.each_child{ |child| # Do something with child }

Can't you feel the peace and contentment in this block of code? Ruby
is the language Buddha would have programmed in."

After reading several thousand blogs which argue the pros and cons of
RoR and seeing it used in a real shop, I think the benefit does
largely come down to the Ruby language itself.  Once you learn all the
idioms, it's really easy to get stuff done.  Of course there's still
big cons compared to Java - my main gripes are lack of a real
refactoring, intelligent code-completing IDE, and lack of something as
nice as Maven to automatically manage your external and cross-project

Oh, and speaking of XML parsing performance - AJAX is now officially
old news.  AJAJ (Async Javascript And JSON, Javascript Serialized
Object Notation) is the wave of the future.  We don't need no stinking

-- Chad

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to