On Saturday, January 8, 2011 9:12:55 AM UTC-5, Anthony wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Saturday, January 8, 2011 7:31:38 AM UTC-5, cjrh wrote:
>
>> On Jan 7, 11:45 pm, Michele Comitini <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > I think the most misunderstood fact with web2py is that web2py
>> > implementation is improving every day,
>>
>> Do you really think the designers of other web frameworks do not
>> understand how web2py works? They definitely understand, and they
>> probably understand better than you or I. The problem is that web2py
>> design is different from their own design. Because we operate in the
>> same space, they try to show why their decisions are better. To be
>> fair, Massimo has been doing exactly the same thing by comparing w2py
>> versus the others for years. Quid pro quo. If we get to say why ours
>> is better, then they get to do likewise.
>>
>
> Good point, though it's not exactly the same. Massimo may claim that the
> web2py way is better (actually, he doesn't really make that strong claim --
> rather, I think he would claim that there are trade-offs in design and that
> he and many others prefer the trade-offs web2py has made while still
> respecting that others may prefer different trade-offs). But I don't think
> I've seen Massimo claim that the design decisions of frameworks like Django
> and Flask are actually bad or harmful. In fact, he usually has quite
> positive things to say about other frameworks. The guys on reddit, on the
> other hand, are claiming that web2py's design decisions are outside the
> bounds of acceptability (at least within the Python world) and therefore
> merit either correction or ostracism (in fact, Jacob is not the first guy
> I've seen try to expunge web2py from the community by claiming it's not
> really a "Python" framework and doesn't use "real" Python). Basically,
> Massimo is saying Django, Flask, etc. are all good frameworks that you'll
> probably be happy with, but web2py is even better, and you should give it a
> try. The other guys are saying Django, Flask, etc. are the only "real"
> Python frameworks, and web2py is harmful (technically, and to the community)
> and to be avoided at all costs (until it completely changes its fundamental
> design distinctives and does things the way they do).
>
> Cheers.
>
> Anthony
>
Also, you are right that many of the web2py detractors do probably
understand at least at a high level "how web2py works," but I've been very
surprised at how frequently these supposed experts exhibit complete
misconceptions about web2py. Most of them have never used web2py to build a
real application, and many of them have probably never even downloaded it
and played with it (or read the docs, or looked at the source code). I am by
no means an expert and am relatively new to both Python and web2py, and yet
I routinely spot (and point out) very basic errors these guys make in their
understanding of web2py. If they can't be bothered to comprehend the very
basic things that even I know, their opinions about web2py really can't be
taken seriously. The problem isn't that they don't know web2py, it's that
they're willing to make such bold proclamations about it despite their
ignorance and lack of experience with it. The fact that web2py has been
around for several years and has a growing, active, and highly satisfied
user base provides them no clue that perhaps their hypothetical concerns
don't play out in reality.
Anthony
