On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Michael Schuerig <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday 20 May 2009, RSL wrote: >> Merb was always putting out this line about how Rails had no public >> API. I found it laughable at first because >> http://api.rubyonrails.org/ seemed to obviously refute this. However, >> recently I've noticed this same line still being trotted about, by >> "Rails" "activists" no less. Can someone give me an honest answer why >> this what seems to me to be a baldface lie is being promoted from >> within our own ranks now? > > Hold your horses. Rails having no public API is a mis-statement of a > very real shortcoming. As you point out, a public Application PI is > there indeed. What's missing is a defined interface for people extending > or otherwise hacking Rails. > > The usual approach is just to do what currently works. Consequently, > code like that is bound to break on updates to the Rails code base. A > defined interface could future-proof such code. > > It's unfortunate that the term API is used in this context as that's not > what the problem is about. An SPI (Service PI) it is neither. I have no > suggestion for a better term. >
EPI = Extension Programming Interface? PPI (Plugin...) > Michael > > -- > Michael Schuerig > mailto:[email protected] > http://www.schuerig.de/michael/ > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
