mathew wong wrote: > Hi Luis, > > Perhaps I was a bit too rash when I said the price one pays to use > web.py, thinking about it my first reaction would be to further > explain why would one pay the price in using such a minimalist > framework. It's kind of a paradox, on one hand you have guys like us > who shun the automation of bigger frameworks such as RoR and Django, > because we don't have much control of what happens and we don't know > what is going on under the hood so to speak. Taking these two > considerations and you have what amounts to alot of time wasted trying > to learn the framework and fighting it into submission to get the kind > of effect you want to achieve with it. With that in mind you seek for > something with considerably less automation in favor for something > that requires a bit of legwork but allows you to achieve your goals to > a greater effect. > > It perplexes me that GVR blessed Django as the framework for Python. I > would like to think that those who use Django want something that they > could kick out of the door rather quickly and not spend time looking > for libs and modules to glue together. Django's appeal I believe that > it's a ready made solution for the kind of problems that Django is > best suited for. > > Mathew > > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Luis Gonzalez <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > 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] > <mailto:[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] > <mailto:[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! > >
We tried webpy and yes, really liked the simplicity, performance, and community but couldn't get past a couple of issues - maybe we missed things that others can comment on: 1) found the controller class scheme confusing - ie if we have customers and we want a page to display a table, another page to display a graph - it seems we have to write 2 classes with get functions - instead of a customer class that has a listing function and a table function. 2) didn't like the default template but seems to be easy enough to change to more popular jinja (django, werkzeug, rails-like) 3) ran into trouble with the db iters - seems you can only pass thru the list once yet in our pages we often have to pass thru or access more depending on the display modules. Yes, you can stick in an ORM but it gets awkward and frankly find SQLAlchemy too much work/complexity. With Python lists, seems there should be a simple way to more easily extract/submit data like in PHP - maybe there is and we don't see it. And maybe that goes away if using GAE or CouchDB (we're really interested in Couch too). Rails has tons of magic but at least counters by giving developers many easy features. Didn't like Django much at all (too many reasons for here). But the simple, lean, mean framework style of WebPy, like Merb or Sinatra in Ruby or CodeIgniter in PHP has lots of appeal. ps: really like the webpy cookbook format - great asset to get things done. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
