Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> Very interesting numbers, please allow me a question, you have only 43
> lines of java code in your application, but 1107 lines ruby code...
> but are talking about smaller code base with ror? :-)
>
Forgot to mention.
The developers that preceded me put all their code in
Very interesting numbers, please allow me a question, you have only 43
lines of java code in your application, but 1107 lines ruby code...
but are talking about smaller code base with ror? :-)
leon
On 2/21/06, Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> > A pretty simple docu
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> A pretty simple document management system, for a small intranet, I'm
> sure a typical application. It contains view and edit interfaces,
> in the edit interface you can manage document vendors, document type
> (like manual, presentation, advertisement material and so), and
Dave,
Sorry for bothering you again, but can we go it through on an example?
Lets assume I hava a very small website to build (I actually did that
one, so I know the real effort and duration).
A pretty simple document management system, for a small intranet, I'm
sure a typical application. It cont
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> I rather ment things like interception/reflection or/and AOP :-)
>
Ah.
Lots of reflection. AOP is being actively discussed for Ruby2. Pure-Ruby
implementations for simple AOP exist but I've not used them.
> Pardon me for being devils advocate, but how do you measure it?
On 2/20/06, Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> > well... maybe you are a totally cool development team,
> A yeah.
>
> Okay, not really ;)
> > following call stacks, debugging... distribution and so on
> > would be a real mess... but, as I told before, I never tried
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> But... from reading the docs, the language itself is as outdated as
> prolog or perl. You have almost no oo-concepts, and all co-concepts
> are missing completely.
Uh, how do you figure that?
It's largely modeled around SmallTalk. It's quite a bit more OOP than
most things
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> well... maybe you are a totally cool development team,
A yeah.
Okay, not really ;)
> following call stacks, debugging... distribution and so on
> would be a real mess... but, as I told before, I never tried myself.
>
Call stacks are no issue. If you know the API and
well... maybe you are a totally cool development team, maybe I'm
completely wrong either... I just had the feeling that making code
reviews, following call stacks, debugging... distribution and so on
would be a real mess... but, as I told before, I never tried myself.
But
what are the benefits for
gt;
> Can you go more into this?
>
> Shawn
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Leon Rosenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 2:03 PM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [OT] Ruby on rails VS Java Based Web Applications
>
> Well RoR is a
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> On 2/20/06, Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Leon Rosenberg wrote:
>>
>>> Well RoR is a wonderful thing if you are playing. But you can't
>>> develop and you have no chance to maintain a serious application with it.
>>>
>> I'm having zero issues mai
On 2/20/06, Dave Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> > Well RoR is a wonderful thing if you are playing. But you can't
> > develop and you have no chance to maintain a serious application with it.
> I'm having zero issues maintaining several, although they are not
> high-loa
couple times before) but I
fail to
see how they are beneficial to use.
Shawn
-Original Message-
From: James Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 2:26 PM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [OT] Ruby on rails VS Java Based Web Applications
Struts (r
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
> Well RoR is a wonderful thing if you are playing. But you can't
> develop and you have no chance to maintain a serious application with it.
I'm having zero issues maintaining several, although they are not
high-load apps yet.
The thing I dislike most about it is moving back
James Mitchell wrote:
> Struts (right now!) let's you setup a single action mapping (wild card
> mapping) and a single LazyDynaBean, and then you can add as many
> Actions and JSPs as you like (at runtime no doubt) and your changes
> are instantly available without ever rebooting or touching xml ag
Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [OT] Ruby on rails VS Java Based Web Applications
Struts (right now!) let's you setup a single action mapping (wild
card mapping) and a single LazyDynaBean, and then you can add as many
Actions and JSPs as you like (at runtime no doubt) and your changes
are
Re: [OT] Ruby on rails VS Java Based Web Applications
Well RoR is a wonderful thing if you are playing. But you can't
develop and you have no chance to maintain a serious application with
it. So the proper question would be RoR or php and php would probably
win :-)
Leon
On 2/20/06,
Struts (right now!) let's you setup a single action mapping (wild
card mapping) and a single LazyDynaBean, and then you can add as many
Actions and JSPs as you like (at runtime no doubt) and your changes
are instantly available without ever rebooting or touching xml again.
Between that and
Well RoR is a wonderful thing if you are playing. But you can't
develop and you have no chance to maintain a serious application with
it. So the proper question would be RoR or php and php would probably
win :-)
Leon
On 2/20/06, Garner, Shawn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anyone give me pros a
Can anyone give me pros and cons of using Ruby on Rails verses a Java Base
Web Application (Struts, JSF, etc)?
Seems like Rails is moving towards less or no configuration files while
JSF/Shale is leaning towards more.
Shawn
*
20 matches
Mail list logo
