Jacques Crocker wrote: > On an unrelated note, I saw some your previous posts reference testing > RJS methods. RJS enabled Rails apps are very difficult to port to Merb > since there is currently no javascript generating Ruby libraries > currently for Merb. Would be cool if someone wrote RJS as a plugin to > Merb (maybe they have?)
That sounds like more than cool; the Rails 3 + Merb marriage would appear to require it. Whatever your opinion of RJS abuse, it will continue! > but that might not be high priority on > developers minds because RJS is a pretty poor web development > practice. I got on the bandwagon early when it came out in Rails only > to realize all too well the major drawbacks of generating javascript > code on the server to be run on the client side. But thats a topic for > another thread. I always figured the relationship between the Ruby DSLs (ActiveRecord, RJS, content_tag) and their target languages (SQL, JS, HTML) was the same as the relationship between early C and Assembler. You write the C to avoid writing the Assembler, but it's always there, under the hood, when you need it. The good news is our platforms, such as all the web browsers out there, must now start permitting better DSLs and better code generation. The comparison to C and Assembler is that modern CPUs are now tuned to work with C compiler technology, not the other way around. -- Phlip --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
