I think you wanna take a look at seaside.

Julian.


On 19/11/2008, at 12:52 PM, Anselm Hook wrote:

> Hey, apologies for not really speaking clearly here - I have to go  
> on stage soon to present something else.
>
> Anyway - here's some argument on the idea of flattening slices away,  
> and kind of contextualized by some previous work which I did when I  
> first learned ruby a while back:
>
>    http://appwiki.org
>    http://makerlab.org/projects/show/appwiki
>
> To be more precise.  Here is a base component:
>
>    
> http://code.google.com/p/applicationwiki/source/browse/trunk/base/base_controller.rb
>
> And this user component subclasses the base:
>
>    
> http://code.google.com/p/applicationwiki/source/browse/trunk/user/user_controller.rb
>
> Now note this was when I was first learning ruby... so it is not  
> terrific work.
>
> But I was able to *VERY* quickly build out several applications,  
> each only slight variations of the previous - by using this  
> approach.  Instead of asking merb to generate me yet another set of  
> mvc files for a particular slice of functionality - I would just ask  
> for an inheritance of an existing component....
>
> This whole idea failed due to lack of interest.  But I'm still  
> personally interested in just trying to advocate for the idea of the  
> flattest possible slices, and allowing for inheritance.
>
> Apologies again if I am unclear... this is about the best I can do  
> to try convey the idea without belaboring it to death.
>
>  - me
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Anselm Hook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Granted,  well my ignorance is more a lack of time to be totally  
> clear but I did write an alter framework that specified my ideas as  
> an actual implementation - see http://appwiki.org - I applied  
> several ideas in this framework pushing mostly against rails which I  
> found very clumsy.  Will try be more clear later when time permits.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 18, 2008, at 4:47 PM, Julian Leviston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Anselm,
>>
>> I'm not too sure you understand MVC very well.
>>
>> Rails OOP is fairly "broken" and "magic" IMHO, therefore it  
>> encourages such malformed views on how an application's logic needs  
>> to be broken up into Model, View and Controller: things "connect"  
>> automatically in the background (which is VERY useful, if you've  
>> ever tried to roll your own).
>>
>> The whole "Resource" thing, if not clearly presented (and this *IS*  
>> very complicated stuff), tends to encourage a retarded  
>> understanding of the relationship of the classes involved in the  
>> entire landscape of the problem domain.
>>
>> Magic is powerful, but has the potential to really burn muggles if  
>> there are no wizards around (okay, I'll put the Harry Potter  
>> analogy away now).
>>
>> It disturbs me, slightly, for example, that you appear not to know  
>> how to subclass a Ruby class, and yet you are making suggestions to  
>> core developers of a framework!
>>
>> I think that there may be a tendency by the core team to take  
>> suggestions from EVERYONE, which is okay, but perhaps they would do  
>> well to take suggestions from people who demonstrate a little that  
>> they know what they're talking about AND what they're suggesting  
>> first.
>>
>> Perhaps, Anselm, you would do well to explain EXPLICITLY and in  
>> detail how you would like this to operate, and if you have an  
>> actual requirement for this feature, then to give us the real  
>> context the query and issue came from. If you can't demonstrate its  
>> reality, then perhaps it's not a valid concern yet!
>>
>> Julian.
>>
>> On 19/11/2008, at 11:32 AM, Anselm Hook wrote:
>>
>>> granted i accept many of those args - just use classes or make a  
>>> gem etcetera,
>>>
>>> but to qualify the argument a bit - just to make sure that i am  
>>> communicating clearly:
>>>
>>> i want to subclass views also, so if i have a slice with a model  
>>> view control like
>>>
>>> class user << default merb controller of some kind
>>>    def login
>>>      render  # ---> this goes off and connects to app/views/users/ 
>>> login.html.erb
>>>    end
>>> end
>>>
>>> i should be able to do subclass the entire behavior, like,
>>>
>>> class betteruser << some kind of subclass of the other  
>>> model,view,controller of user
>>>   def favoritecolor
>>>      render
>>>   end
>>> end
>>>
>>> and just cite the entire other slice without a non dry style  
>>> copying and pasting of the layout templates into a new folder...   
>>> in the above example i wouldn't even express the 'login'  
>>> capability at all again - it would be inherited - including the  
>>> view.
>>>
>>>  - anselm
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Julian Leviston <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>> > wrote:
>>> It sounds like you just want a bunch of classes, so why not create  
>>> a bunch of classes?
>>>
>>> Julian.
>>>
>>> On 19/11/2008, at 7:06 AM, Anselm Hook wrote:
>>>
>>>> my criticism of slices is that they enforce the mvc folder  
>>>> paradigm that is so tedious to browse through and create  
>>>> directory and navigation nightmares - why not conflate the  
>>>> controllers, views and model into a single folder?  it would just  
>>>> be an acknowledgement that this is a fundamentally different  
>>>> pattern that is not quite so mvc centric but rather component  
>>>> centric.
>>>>
>>>> another criticism is that i cannot subclass a slice... why do we  
>>>> leave the land of object oriented design and not support  
>>>> inheritance once we reach the level of components?
>>>>
>>>>  - me
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Michael Klishin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2008/11/18 Aurels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>> > The "lack" of slices on github is probably due to the fact that  
>>>> merb
>>>> > is really young ;)
>>>>
>>>> I think slices authors may want to have a look at projects  
>>>> mentioned
>>>> at djangoplugables.com
>>>> --
>>>> MK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> anselm 415 215 4856 http://hook.org http://makerlab.com http://meedan.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> anselm 415 215 4856 http://hook.org http://makerlab.com http://meedan.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> anselm 415 215 4856 http://hook.org http://makerlab.com http://meedan.net
>
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"merb" 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/merb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to