I actually don't like rails' convention over configuration school of thoughts. It makes everything implicit. For any large rails app it's difficult to reason about how things are working, unless you learn all the conventions by heart (by the way, these conventions don't seem to be documented well)
Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
91–100 of 225 posts
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#92Concurrency aside, why is Elixir preferred over Ruby when it doesn't even have a native array implementation? No, lists and tuples are no substitute nor are maps with numeric keys as Jose has suggested. If you want an array in Elixir your only option is Erlang's implementation which ain't pretty - http://erlang.org/doc/man/array.html . When I raised this issue in the mailing list and on IRC the response was invariabl…
I've just started learning Elixir out of interest so I can't quite answer your question. However, I'd like to ask: what have you found to be difficult to do using the Elixir types such as tuples, list, keyword lists, and maps that would otherwise be easy to do using arrays? I'm asking out of genuine curiosity because I've specifically noticed a lack of arrays when learning Elixir and I'm quite used to using them in o…
Elixir has no native array syntax nor any array functions in the stlib so arrays are basically second class citizens rather than completely absent. Ask not why I need them but why anyone might need them if the Elixir is supposed to be a general purpose language. Why does Clojure need them or Ruby or Python (lists)? If I want to process data as a large indexed array Elixir isn't going to help me and some Elixir devs have conceded that it may not be suitable for large scale data processing. We all know Elixir/Erlang excels at distributed concurrency but the question here is whether it is deficient in other areas, making it too much of a niche language.
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#93Concurrency aside, why is Elixir preferred over Ruby when it doesn't even have a native array implementation? No, lists and tuples are no substitute nor are maps with numeric keys as Jose has suggested. If you want an array in Elixir your only option is Erlang's implementation which ain't pretty - http://erlang.org/doc/man/array.html . When I raised this issue in the mailing list and on IRC the response was invariabl…
Does absence of arrays look a problem for you, while general immutability of most everything and message-based approach look totally normal and easy to grasp?
I suspect that to use Elixir, you need to study a new way of doing things first. Then you'll see arrays in a different light.
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's around 12 times faster in the general sense. Your mileage may vary. If you spend $200 you could theoretically hosting the same product on $50 worth of hardware.
That saving of $150 is equivalent to one hour of pro dev work time. It's hardly worth converting unless Elxir / Phoenix is much more productive and maintainable.
> That saving of $150 is equivalent to one hour of pro dev work time.
Fair point, unless you have more customers. Then it can start to add up quickly. And by customers it means requests as well. Being able to handle large traffic spikes and continous connections is a game change from what I found.
Moreover. A huge benefit is using the BEAM VM, I use Erlang (but same VM) and I have seen major advantages being able to trace, debug, hotpatch a running system. Some parts of the cluster would be crashing and restarting for a while, and there would be no need to wake everyone up. It can be fixed in the morning kinda deal.
An interesting observation to think about -- importance of fault tollerance grows as quickly or quicker than concurrency. What I mean is if you have a service that handles more concurrent requests, it now becomes are lot more important to have solid fault tollerance, because a single failed request, maybe causing a segfault, can kill all of them for example.
That is a bit hard to understand unless you see it practice. You can think of it this way -- it doesn't matter if the system can handle 100K requests / second. If it is not fault tollerant, when it crashes it handles 0 requests / second. Depending how crappy the uptime is, you can average those number and get something that's pretty low.
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#95I am very jealous as a Django developer. They decided to keep Channels as a third-party package after all, maintained by a single guy :(
Kind of.
48 contributors total (Yes, Andrew is doing most) - https://github.com/andrewgodwin/channels/graphs/contributors
It sounds like it wasn't decided to keep 3rd party as much as decided not to not combine yet:
> The feedback I got during the proposal process for putting Channels into Django 1.10 (it did not get in before the deadline, but will still be developed as an external app with 1.10) was valuable; some of the more recent changes and work, such as backpressure and the local-and-remote Redis backend, are based on feedback from that process, and I imagine more tweaks will emerge as more things get deployed on Channels.
https://www.aeracode.org/2016/6/16/philosophy-channels/
You can still use Channels today in 1.8–1.10.
https://blog.heroku.com/in_deep_with_django_channels_the_fut...
This project is very much in the spotlight, was heavily discussed at PyCon, etc. I don't think it's going anywhere.
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#96Concurrency aside, why is Elixir preferred over Ruby when it doesn't even have a native array implementation? No, lists and tuples are no substitute nor are maps with numeric keys as Jose has suggested. If you want an array in Elixir your only option is Erlang's implementation which ain't pretty - http://erlang.org/doc/man/array.html . When I raised this issue in the mailing list and on IRC the response was invariabl…
Python lacks a native array too but its list type seems to do just fine. What is it you want to do that you that requires an array?
Python's lists are lists in name only when compared with lists in functional languages. Whilst Python may offer additional array/vector implementations its lists are equivalent to arrays or vectors in other languages such as Ruby.
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#97Looks like a solid and and relatively straightforward upgrade from Rails 4.2. It's hard not to feel Rails has become a bit of a slow-moving behemoth though, with this release four years after 4.0. I've still got a couple clients using 3.2 from 2012 and things aren't that different. Smart money at this point seems like a significant portion of the Rails community could begin moving to Elixir/Phoenix over the coming ye…
I think the upgrade challenge is going to be the dependencies - declarative_authorization, typus, etc. Ah well, all part of the fun.
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#98Concurrency aside, why is Elixir preferred over Ruby when it doesn't even have a native array implementation? No, lists and tuples are no substitute nor are maps with numeric keys as Jose has suggested. If you want an array in Elixir your only option is Erlang's implementation which ain't pretty - http://erlang.org/doc/man/array.html . When I raised this issue in the mailing list and on IRC the response was invariabl…
Why do you want an array? You mean you want a memory area with adjacent cells layed out, to talk to C perhaps? Perhaps might want a list, a binary, or a sorted set, a tuple, a map and so on. You have to tell a bit more about your use case. I used Erlang for many years, and in the last one full time. Not one time have I needed an "array". It seems you picked one odd feature no-one uses and are upset about it, I thik i…
I would need an array for processing any large data set as an indexed collection. Why is that considered an "odd feature no-one uses" when it's a fundamental data type in most mainstream languages?
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#99Concurrency aside, why is Elixir preferred over Ruby when it doesn't even have a native array implementation? No, lists and tuples are no substitute nor are maps with numeric keys as Jose has suggested. If you want an array in Elixir your only option is Erlang's implementation which ain't pretty - http://erlang.org/doc/man/array.html . When I raised this issue in the mailing list and on IRC the response was invariabl…
This isn't a defensive response, just a genuinely curious one.
For certain types of programming - generally in lower-level languages - arrays can be essential for performance. But then my assumption is that if you needed that kind of performance, you'd be using those languages.
So outside of performance, what's the functional difference between an actual array implementation - and a thing that looks, walks, and quacks like a duck?
Re: Rails 5.0: Action Cable, API mode, and more
#100Concurrency aside, why is Elixir preferred over Ruby when it doesn't even have a native array implementation? No, lists and tuples are no substitute nor are maps with numeric keys as Jose has suggested. If you want an array in Elixir your only option is Erlang's implementation which ain't pretty - http://erlang.org/doc/man/array.html . When I raised this issue in the mailing list and on IRC the response was invariabl…
if you need constant time access by index to a sequence of fixed size elements you can use binaries. if you want constant time access to a sequence of fixed size you can use tuples. if you want both you can get close with maps using integer keys or with trees (which i believe are used by clojure behind the scenes for arrays)