Michael Pavling wrote: > On 20 May 2010 07:10, egervari <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, are there any really unbiased comparisons between rails and >> grails, and to which each framework is better suited for? > > Rails is better suited to people that know Ruby but not Java. > Grails is better suited to people that know Java but not Ruby.
The information I have come across from people who know both frameworks and languages well is that Rails is better designed and easier to work with than Grails. My former boss wrote probably the largest Groovy project in the history of the language. He later switched his business over to being a Rails consultancy. I think it's significant that with all his Groovy experience, he didn't choose Grails. > >> I started to use grails, and it's all well and good, but there's some >> things i don't like about it. >> >> <snipped a bunch of off topic rambling> > > I'd suggest taking these issues up on a Grails mailing-list might get > you some constructive ideas as to how to overcome them Yes, indeed. > >> The one thing I have against rails/ruby is that I hate their method >> names. Underscores are confusing to me because they sort of look like >> operators. Maybe can get used to this, but I hate methods like to_s >> for toString. That stuff is going to drive me nuts. > > Personal preference certainly plays a big part in any platform choice; > but there's hardly a lot our input can do about whether you "like" > underscores or not. To the OP: you think an underscore looks like an *operator*? What operator does it look like? What are you in danger of confusing it with? Personally, I'd rather use underscores. Their width looks more like spaces and lets me parse words more quickly. I find that my_variable_name reads almost like spaced text, whereas myVariableName looks clunky, computerish, and undifferentiated. (Larry Wall basically said the same thing in one of his Perl style guides, FWIW.) > >> Anyway, our site has to support a lot of traffic, requires a lot of >> cron-like stuff built into the application, and we'll need to support >> relational databases and something like cassandra. > > You can write poor-performing or well-performing applications in either. > > Unfortunately for your quest to make a decision, both Rails and Grails > support relational databases and "things like cassandra" (as well as > cassandra specifically), so that's not edging either of them toward a > preference. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- 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.
