41–50 of 80 posts
No
If you'd take a look at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html and follow the spirit of the site, we'd appreciate it.
If you already know Rails, yes. If you are thinking about learning Rails now, probably not. Yes Rails is great for MVPs, but then so are a lot of other things, like Meteor.
Much of what you learn in Ruby and Rails is not portable to other languages. Ruby and Rails are deeply flawed and much of what you learn is dealing with those flaws. Similar to learning PHP for example (but differently flawed than PHP). Ruby is also showing its age and is lagging behind modern languages. Rails is probably fine and fast and good for small projects. It is probably not good for professional large projec…
UserOne: Don't use [insert language] and [insert framework] because [bad design flaw] and doesn't scale.
UserTwo: But [BigCo with millions of users].
Yes. Rails has by now certainly crossed into boring software territory – arguably a [positive thing]( http://mcfunley.com/choose-boring-technology ) anyway – but it remains an excellent choice coming into 2018: - Out of the box, Rails has close to unbeatable developer ergonomics, tooling, stability, and ease of use - Lots of high quality, large companies use it (GitHub, Shopify, Airbnb, Square, Twitch) and have by no…
Boring yet still very volatile. I wonder if or when Rails will settle down and stop changing everything between major releases causing all documentation to be out of date, gems to break, developer habits to break, etc. Not to mention all of the related tooling like Bundler which seems to spit out new and uninteresting warnings and errors every time I update it. It would be great to be able to write an application usi…
I'm not Rubyist, but when I see an article about RoR it's one of these: "I just started using Ruby and omg it's out-of-box everything, rapid development, monkeypatching makes everything super easy, it's like second Jesus coming." and the second category is this: "I am working with RoR for years, maintaining/migrating anything is super painful, because everyone is monkeypatching everything, so you cant safely touch an…
Most Rails applications I see have minimal monkeypatching and I can’t remember the last time I had to debug an issue related to one. On the contrary, monkeypatching is most often used to fix issues in libraries that would otherwise require forking or pushing changes upstream to the project to fix. For example, Rails 3.2 is missing a few time duration methods from Rails 4 which Ruby 2.4 relies on so you need to add those via monkeypatch to run Ruby 2.4 with the legacy Rails version if you can’t upgrade everything at once.
I've recently started to learn vue.js and it's making JavaScript a pleasure to use alongside rails. I think my future projects will be vue + rails by default
I'm not Rubyist, but when I see an article about RoR it's one of these: "I just started using Ruby and omg it's out-of-box everything, rapid development, monkeypatching makes everything super easy, it's like second Jesus coming." and the second category is this: "I am working with RoR for years, maintaining/migrating anything is super painful, because everyone is monkeypatching everything, so you cant safely touch an…
Yes, Rails helps developers make good upfront choices to the structuring of their application and database. The DB layer and structure is going to be a bottleneck well before the programming framework is (I think this is true in any framework). I enjoy that Rails makes it easy to do things like take care of N+1 queries, do associations correctly, etc. That isn't exclusive to Rails, but it is really good in Rails.
Smart, experienced people can of course identify where the framework leaves off and build within the confines of Rails to get things done. But I wouldn't say that Rails makes it particularly easy to, for example, use a object-oriented approach the the model layer. ActiveRecord, with its lovely but dangerous APIs, really wants to be your everything class. Domain namespacing, while doable (you can do anything in Ruby), isn't particularly intuitive compared to other parts of the framework.
None of this is to say that Rails is a bad tool and I'm grateful for what it's provided (thank you OSS maintainers). It does, however, trade medium-term maintainability for the up-front productivity it offers, which could be totally fine, but for me doesn't feel like a great trade.
If you already know Rails, yes. If you are thinking about learning Rails now, probably not. Yes Rails is great for MVPs, but then so are a lot of other things, like Meteor.
What would you suggest if you don't know rails?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boring yet still very volatile. I wonder if or when Rails will settle down and stop changing everything between major releases causing all documentation to be out of date, gems to break, developer habits to break, etc. Not to mention all of the related tooling like Bundler which seems to spit out new and uninteresting warnings and errors every time I update it. It would be great to be able to write an application usi…
Volatile in comparison to what exactly?