21–30 of 39 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At Plurk.com we use node.js to provide comet updates to over 300.000 active clients at _once_. It's not a toy and it scales much better than most of other web-stacks I have tried. Read more here: http://amix.dk/blog/post/19490#Plurk-Instant-conversations-u...
comet updates are a niche application
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of the article is to bring Ringo in the spotlight. I strongly believe that the developers are doing a great job and the seamless access to Java libraries is the great selling point. If the article generates some (well deserved) attention for Ringo, it will be a success (even if some people do not agree with the wording)
Ever consider just submitting a talk about RingoJS to "cool marketing" AKA JSConf? We are a pretty open and "underdog-rooting" group. I might know someone up in the decision committee...
Apparently I've been living in a "cage". I think he meant cave, but nonetheless I haven't heard that server side JavaScript is all the rage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
inflammatory posts with little to no statistical backing are a niche application. That said, if you were to flip the post to be "hey node.js is cool, but check out RingoJS while you are already hot for SSJS" Now that would be awesome!
just ignore the nodejs part, then you don't have to like the whole article... (btw, nodejs and ringojs are on the same side: SSJS)
> ... managed to grab the attention of the developer community with cool marketing I am not sure I would call a very good talk at jsconf "marketing" nor would I think of Ryan Dahl as "the new DHH" especially when Ryan has been known to "wish for less node.js hype". It seems you dislike the attention node.js has been given instead of node.js itself. > Contrast this to reports of NodeJS crashes. This belies an assumpti…
I don't dislike node.js (I don't agree with the direction). I just believe that RingoJS is a better solution for the majority of developers. (NodeJS may be better in niche applications like chat systems, a gaming server etc, even though I believe that technologies like GAE's forthcoming Channel API are even better)
The OP's advice is sound: Stop making groundless rips on the other tool, and talk about why Ringo is better. Even "better" is totally subjective, because it depends on what you WANT from a tool.
But instead of saying "If you like x, you'll love Ringo!" you basically resorted to telling those of us who love node that we're stupid.
I frankly don't care. I've seen Ringo in action and I looked at the code, and I didn't like it at all. The points you gave it in its favor don't matter to me, either. I think node is vastly superior.
But, I'm not sniping about it in inflammatory blog posts. I just. don't. use. it. That's what you do when you don't like something: you don't use it.
Getting all aggro just makes you look childish, and causes people to ignore your message.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't dislike node.js (I don't agree with the direction). I just believe that RingoJS is a better solution for the majority of developers. (NodeJS may be better in niche applications like chat systems, a gaming server etc, even though I believe that technologies like GAE's forthcoming Channel API are even better)
Yes, and the way to win people to your way of thinking is to tell them that it's because of "cool marketing" and that it is a "toy." Swell! The OP's advice is sound: Stop making groundless rips on the other tool, and talk about why Ringo is better. Even "better" is totally subjective, because it depends on what you WANT from a tool. But instead of saying "If you like x, you'll love Ringo!" you basically resorted to t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At Plurk.com we use node.js to provide comet updates to over 300.000 active clients at _once_. It's not a toy and it scales much better than most of other web-stacks I have tried. Read more here: http://amix.dk/blog/post/19490#Plurk-Instant-conversations-u...
Comparing comet performance between node and ringo should be interesting. Ringo uses jetty/cometd, so it should scale pretty decently as well. My guess is that node will use less memory per connection (and thus allow more simultanous connections), while ringo/jetty should have better latency. This is also what this benchmark suggests: http://praxx.is/post/486034949/comet-with-bayeux-node-js-vs-...
"We have rewritten to node.js from Java+JBoss Netty, because the old solution had scalability problems. We have also been able to build a very sophisticated messaging system given JavaScript expressiveness and the simplicity of node.js. Generally, we have found node.js and V8 very impressive - and it uses about 10 times less memory than Java+Netty did."
Jetty Comet uses a lot more memory than a vanilla JBoss Netty implementation - at least based on my benchmarks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't dislike node.js (I don't agree with the direction). I just believe that RingoJS is a better solution for the majority of developers. (NodeJS may be better in niche applications like chat systems, a gaming server etc, even though I believe that technologies like GAE's forthcoming Channel API are even better)
Yes, and the way to win people to your way of thinking is to tell them that it's because of "cool marketing" and that it is a "toy." Swell! The OP's advice is sound: Stop making groundless rips on the other tool, and talk about why Ringo is better. Even "better" is totally subjective, because it depends on what you WANT from a tool. But instead of saying "If you like x, you'll love Ringo!" you basically resorted to t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't dislike node.js (I don't agree with the direction). I just believe that RingoJS is a better solution for the majority of developers. (NodeJS may be better in niche applications like chat systems, a gaming server etc, even though I believe that technologies like GAE's forthcoming Channel API are even better)
Yes, and the way to win people to your way of thinking is to tell them that it's because of "cool marketing" and that it is a "toy." Swell! The OP's advice is sound: Stop making groundless rips on the other tool, and talk about why Ringo is better. Even "better" is totally subjective, because it depends on what you WANT from a tool. But instead of saying "If you like x, you'll love Ringo!" you basically resorted to t…
My problem with NodeJS is that it practically stopped the progress on the CommonJS discussion group, by moving the attention from important issues like a standard library, module transport, etc to non-issues like async. What a pitty...
- Supports (most of) JavaScript 1.8 (thanks to Rhino): list comprehensions, destructuring assignments, expression closures &c. - those features [1] give the language a distinctly Pythonic feel and can lead to significantly more compact code.
- The CommonJS module system: works as expected. Not having a proper module system was one of the few drawbacks of Helma (the predecessor of RingoJS).
- Having full and easy access to the whole JVM ecosystem often makes it easy to bootstrap things, even if they're later rewritten in pure JavaScript.
- Some very exciting packages are starting to appear [2]; a current favorite of mine is berkeleystore (essentially an automatically-indexing JSON store): http://github.com/hns/berkeleystore#readme
- (Usually) laid-back, friendly & competent community (#ringojs!).
I wouldn't consider RingoJS "mature"; while it can be extremely useful in its current state (it certainly is for me) and the core functionality is stable, there's also a lot of (important) work left to do, especially when it comes to the "batteries".
In other words: For people who enjoy API and library design, RingoJS is an excellent project to contribute to right now ;-).
[1] Added to the language by Brendan Eich, more information here: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/new_in_javascript_1.8