On Fri, March 9, 2012 09:45, Trek Glowacki wrote: > So, just to recap the flow of this conversation for > myself: > > a) We, as developers *of* Rails (or at least those who > lurk here), realize that we're not the primary target of > scaffolding. So, while it could be moved to gem for pros, > it would be hard on new developers if it wasn't baked in > and highlighted in guides/docs > > b) People who have spent time teaching Rails to new folks > have chimed in saying they don't tell people to about > scaffolding or, if they show people it exits, it's with a > hand-wavy caveat: don't use this yet, since you don't know > what it's all doing. > > c) Folks who haven't taught Rails (or at least didn't > mention it) say the teaching folks thinking about it > backwards: "After you know, using it is a cheap trick, > before then it's a useful way to get an example and dig > in." > > d) Other people counter saying "no idea about the n00bs, > but I use scaffolding so much that I have custom scaffolds > to match my coding style" > > Thoughts: > * Scaffolding is less useful to new Rails developers – at > least those with a learning resource of some kind – than > we assumed > * Scaffolding is more useful to pro Rails developers – > especially with personalization – than we assumed > > Separating/keeping the scaffold generator might be a good > Github ticket-based question for the larger Rails > community. Then we'd get a feel for how many people use it > and how they're using it. > > If the answer is "hardly anyone and many of those people > use customization" it might indicate that scaffolding > generation would be a good 3rd party project: scaffold > users could give scaffolding the loving care it deserves. > The notion that it's a tool for beginners might be holding > back some truly excellent growth > > If the answer is "almost everyone and without > customization" then it should remain as part of core. I'd > *still* argue it should be moved out of the Getting > Started with Rails guides > > If the answer is "never use it now, but it was invaluably > helpful when I was learning" then the suggestion of making > it a more incremental generator that can build the entire > REST pattern over time by running it multiple times would > be awesome. I think this would also jive better with the > TDD/BDD threads floating through Rails. I've always found > it odd to talk TDD and then generate a hundred lines of > untested code.
I agree that an incremental code generator for RoR would be an incredible tool. Whether it is feasible is another question. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrne mailto:[email protected] Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 -- 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.
