Massimo, Appreciate your comments.
As mentioned by you, web2py has packaged all the functionality needed by a web app in a single api, and I am finding this very interesting. This certainly allows one to create a web app pretty fast. The only remaining question is that how easy is it to pull apart things and modify them as needed. As I understand web2py will certainly speed up my development. However when I need flexibility will I still be easily able to change defaults and tweak things ? ( something that loosely couple frameworks provide over full stack frameworks) Thanks, Murtaza On Saturday, July 7, 2012 1:26:34 AM UTC+5:30, Massimo Di Pierro wrote: > > As pointed out what I said is that I would pick ROR of "most" python > frameworks. > > In general I prefer to program in Python rather then Ruby. Indentation > makes the code more readable and there are more libraries. Ruby is used in > Rails but not much else. Python is used for all kind of things (think about > numpy, blender, pyglet, etc.). > > Yet Ruby is better designed than most Python framework because if favors > convention over configuration. Most Python frameworks instead follow the > Python motto "explicit is better the implicit" and the authors despise the > concept of "default behaviour" which they refer to as "magic". This means > that even very simple simple such as serving a static file require a fair > amount of programing. Moreover, as a corollary, most frameworks come in > pieces. Ever piece has a name and its own marketing people. This exposes > the visibility of the component but it means you have to separately find > and install the components you need, learn their api and make sure they are > compatible with your own version of the code. > > In web2py we tried to copied the RoR approach (everything has a > configuration) and we try to package and maintain as many components as > possible into the same code base (API for authentication, scheduler, cron, > PDF printing, SOAP services, WIKI markup, syntax highlighting, etc.). > Moreover we do not rely on third party modules (only on Python standard > libraries). 99% of what you may want to can be done with basic web2py > without needing external packages. This means the apps are very portable > between one installation and another. > > The main difference between web2py and other frameworks in practice is not > soo much in the its API (which more or less are the same for all > frameworks) but for what web2py does for you on the management site: no > packages to install, manage through the web interface, no shell programming > unless you want to, automatic migrations. > > Massimo > > > > On Friday, 6 July 2012 00:58:36 UTC-5, murtaza52 wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I am considering three frameworks for developing our commercial >> applications- >> >> 1) web2py (choice #1) >> 2) ROR >> 3) Play framework >> >> While my research I was intrigued by Massimo's post where he says that he >> would pick ROR over any of the current python frameworks. My question is >> how does web2py itself compare to ROR ? What are the views of those >> experienced with both the ecosystems ? >> >> http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/209343 >> >> I have expereince with none so will rely on your answers :) The purpose >> of the question is not to start a flame war, but to understand why should >> web2py be chose over other frameworks which have much more traction today? >> >> Thanks, >> Murtaza >> >>
