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. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
