11–20 of 79 posts
I would love to see how performant lift is (or isn't) when compared to rails and django
I would expect it to be faster than both because it's build in Scala, which is way faster than Ruby and Python.
Just out of curiosity can you highlight the advantages lift has over other modern frameworks such as rails or django (and maybe some of the php frameworks). Most (or all) of the 7 things ship with rails 3. Stacking them up against one another might yield a better comparison.
I think that the author is coming from the Java world, in which case the comparison he likely had in mind is not Rails or django, but the plethora of Java web frameworks. Personally, for Java Web Frameworks there are two I like, for quite different reasons. The first is Spring MVC. the rest of Spring can go die in a fire for all I care, but the Spring MVC part is quite nice. Used properly it allows you to very quickl…
Looks like it's great for building the things the authors thought you might want to build. Just like every other "SuperMagic" framework, I suspect there's a lot of pain to be had once you step just a little outside of what it expects you to do with it. We've all re-written Django inside of Django at least once, and thus have been burned by this sort of thing before. Personally, I think I'll wait to see some big proje…
2. Proxying ads through your own backend that threads itself? Yawn.
3. AJAX and COMET have pretty standard support. Again, this is left up to you with your Javascript library of choice.
4. Again, this is Javascript work. It might save me a little bit of development time, but I'd much rather be in complete control over the process of wiring my pages together.
5. Calling controls through classes isn't any more designer-friendly than Rails or Django template tags.
6. Pretty sure both Rails and Django have one-click install extensions for form Wizards (Rails might support it out of the box, haven't played with 3 enough lately to know)
7. All of these security principles are taken care of my every major web framework I can think of.
So we have some magic Javascript-generating controls and... that's it. Those are nice conveniences for sure, but a lot of these are uncommon use-cases, and I know I can probably bang-out a Django app to handle most of them in an afternoon, or just pull the real Javascript code I've used to handle these cases a dozen times over in the past.
The condescending attitude and failure to meet expectations means I'll probably never look at this framework again, which is a shame because it seems like it might be neat to toy around with. Too bad.
Looks like it's great for building the things the authors thought you might want to build. Just like every other "SuperMagic" framework, I suspect there's a lot of pain to be had once you step just a little outside of what it expects you to do with it. We've all re-written Django inside of Django at least once, and thus have been burned by this sort of thing before. Personally, I think I'll wait to see some big proje…
I don't know much about Lift, but I believe foursquare.com is using it.
On the multi-page form demo. It goes automatically from page 1 to page 3. I expected a page 2.
Sorry, but I failed to understand: is this a web server, a programming language...? I don't exactly get, what it does and for what I should use it.
On the multi-page form demo. It goes automatically from page 1 to page 3. I expected a page 2.
As one of the co-founders and developers of the NOLOH PHP Framework (http://www.noloh.com), I know that we've had many of these features for quite some time, including Comet (we support all protocols including streaming, short-polling and long-polling) with little to no effort on the developer's part, and in many cases significantly less effort than described here in lift.
I have nothing against Lift, and clearly I'm bias, however, the tone should've been less hostile in my opinion. However, maybe the hostile tone is good marketing. It's hard to say.