I agree with the comments here about webpy's minimalistic approach and simplicity. I believe this is what it makes it great, but I don't think this simplicity comes with a price.
Really, what else do you need to make your development easier? Webpy may not have it all, but it has everything is needed: A built in template system, sessions, forms, a very easy and handy db api and that's it. What else do you need? If there's anything webpy doesn't provide you right out of the box, just get it somewhere else and use it within webpy. What's the problem with that? Webpy doesn't impose you any restriction. It's simply python. Do you want an ORM? OK, just choose one and use it. Webpy is so simple and straighforward that anything works by just importing the module and using it as you would in any other python application. Just place the module in your root directory and use it. You don't have to investigate each directory to see where to place each script and things don't get magically generated for you in mysterious places. I never really tried hard to use any of the other big frameworks out there (Django, Turbogears, etc), because I just hate having to learn every little idiosyncratic way of doing everything with them. I feel webpy is just "pythonic". You don't think about how you should do something, you just do it. What's the point of having every little detail in a silver plate for you in you have to read a book first in order to know how to use it? I'd rather code it myself. It's faster and easier, and once you do it, you can save it for reusing later. I still don't understand why GvR endorsed Django as the blessed framework. If there is a pythonic web framework, this is webpy. Heck! It should be included in the standard library (it's small enough). Luis On 18 feb, 22:53, mathew wong <[email protected]> wrote: > Web.py is really minimalist and follows very few conventions quite unlike > the aforementioned frameworks. That part of it really appealed to me and it > is the reason why I use it heavily for alot of my personal projects. > Although that flexibility comes with a price however. Especially if you're > accustomed to having things served to you on a silver platter using web.py > may seem daunting. But the sooner you can get over this the better as it's > minimalist nature is actually a strength. The framework itself is very DIY, > so if you're going to have to implement a couple of things that might be > included in other frameworks. > > Like you I was never comfortable with the Django due to the reasons you've > mentioned. With web.py I atleast have a sense of what's going on and have > the power to grab it and do stuff with it. I'm pretty sure the Django guys > will shoot my argument down, my point is that it wasn't *initially > apparent*when I first used Django. And that was the trouble I had with > it, since I > likened to use minimalist frameworks that just stay out of my way and let me > do stuff (Ramaze, Sinatra, and CodeIgniter to name a few.) hope this helps. > > Thanks, > Mathew > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Éber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > I really like web.py, the fact that it is really minimalist and so > > on... I'm comming from PHP, CakePHP is my framework of choice, and > > maybe it could be better to try Django, but for some reason I don't > > like it... All those automatic stuff... I like to know what is going > > on... so... > > > I would like to know, if someone could tell me, where exactly web.py > > differes from frameworks like CakePHP [besides the fact that it is > > another language] and Django?!? I'm talking about features and > > stuff... > > > Thanks in advanced :) Bye! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web.py" 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/webpy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
