Most of the time for me, personally, it is a matter of resources. If the client wants me to build a project on top of their existing hosting infrastructure it primarily ends up being something in PHP. PHP has a much broader install base than Ruby and Rails so I can always count on having it installed on the client's server.
I agree that most of the PHP code out there in the wild is garbage, but I have to blame the authors and not the language itself -- you can write PHP code that is clean and encapsulated. While Rails is highly- opinionated -- it strongly guides you to use the "Rails Way" -- you can write garbage Ruby code just as easily as you could write garbage PHP or Python code. And as one commenter points out, Twitter learned this lesson the hard way...who in their right mind uses just one table for a web app? Do we blame Rails or the developer? My position on this subject it that if you have the resources to do something in Rails then you can quite often get something up-and- running in much less time than a comparable PHP app. Frameworks like CakePHP and CodeIgniter do have some conventions in common with Rails -- namely an MVC architecture -- but the similarities end there. I use CakePHP or CodeIgniter when I have to work in PHP. I use Django when I have to work in Python. And I use Rails when I want and/or can use Ruby. Given a choice I would choose Rails or Django almost every time. But PHP can be useful too depending on the context. "Know your land, know your prey." :-) On Jul 23, 4:01 am, AlwaysCharging <[email protected]> wrote: > In no am I actually trying to make a digg-like site, it just serves as > a good example for this discussion. (And anyways, there's pligg, > which is an open source cms that'll install a digg-like site in a few > clicks) > > I'm actually just trying to decide which framework to use (rails or > cakephp). I know that twitter uses rails, but honestly that's the > worst website on the net. Not twitter itself, but the actual default > itself. It's almost completely useless, and something like tweetdeck > is a must. Also, I do know that hulu uses rails, and I guess if it's > good enough for a mulimillion dollar joint venture between a couple > mulitbillon dollar corporations, then it should be good enough for > me. However, digg uses php, and I wasn't sure if all the > functionality would be able to implemented using rails. > > All of the rails vs (cake)php comparisons are quite dated, and I'm > still undecided. Yeah, I know, just pick one, I probably can't go > wrong. I just don't want to find out a few months from now that I > made a mistake using rails, and have caused myself a lot more > headache. > > Any insight is greatly appreciated. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
