Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

gilesbowkett.blogspot.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 143 posts

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#81

Post by kiba »

mgkimsal wrote: post #77
betageek wrote: post #12

tl/dr Rails is not the new hotness anymore, the Rails 3 rewrite was a waste of time and it's strayed far from its initial ease of use. Node & Coffeescript, the new hotness, are awesome, here's my new video series, the first one's free.

Funny, I've mentioned "ease of use" and "rails" to a few rails friends, and most have said something along the lines of "Rails was never pitched as easy to use - I've no idea where people get the idea that Rails was intended to be easy to use!". It may be just them, but I've heard it from more than a few Rails people (though not universally). Personally, it feels a bit revisionist, because I distinctly remember the R…

I heard neuroscientists said our memories are actually unreliable and is more likely to become more fictionalized as time passes.

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#82

Post by mattmcknight »

mgkimsal wrote: post #77
betageek wrote: post #12

tl/dr Rails is not the new hotness anymore, the Rails 3 rewrite was a waste of time and it's strayed far from its initial ease of use. Node & Coffeescript, the new hotness, are awesome, here's my new video series, the first one's free.

Funny, I've mentioned "ease of use" and "rails" to a few rails friends, and most have said something along the lines of "Rails was never pitched as easy to use - I've no idea where people get the idea that Rails was intended to be easy to use!". It may be just them, but I've heard it from more than a few Rails people (though not universally). Personally, it feels a bit revisionist, because I distinctly remember the R…

Rails was easy to use/learn in 2006/2007, and, coming from a background of 5 years of writing Java web apps, it was vastly easier than doing that mess.

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#83

Post by gurkendoktor »

glenjamin wrote: post #31

While I agree with most of the points, you can just do require 'bundler' Bundler.setup In your Rakefile, and never have to type bundle exec. This is exactly what I use in my commandline Node.JS project which is BDD tested using cucumber and aruba.

Does this help if you even bloody `rake` is not backwards compatible? 0.9.x has caused all sorts of trouble for me...

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#84

Post by bad_user »

mattmcknight wrote: post #82
mgkimsal wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I've mentioned "ease of use" and "rails" to a few rails friends, and most have said something along the lines of "Rails was never pitched as easy to use - I've no idea where people get the idea that Rails was intended to be easy to use!". It may be just them, but I've heard it from more than a few Rails people (though not universally). Personally, it feels a bit revisionist, because I distinctly remember the R…

Rails was easy to use/learn in 2006/2007, and, coming from a background of 5 years of writing Java web apps, it was vastly easier than doing that mess.

Easy to use and easy to learn are too very distinct things.

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#85

Post by ramblerman »

kiba wrote: post #81
mgkimsal wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I've mentioned "ease of use" and "rails" to a few rails friends, and most have said something along the lines of "Rails was never pitched as easy to use - I've no idea where people get the idea that Rails was intended to be easy to use!". It may be just them, but I've heard it from more than a few Rails people (though not universally). Personally, it feels a bit revisionist, because I distinctly remember the R…

I heard neuroscientists said our memories are actually unreliable and is more likely to become more fictionalized as time passes.

you sure that's what they said?

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#87

Post by drogus »

pilif wrote: post #43
alinajaf wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK it's mad funny, but what's so hard about `alias bx 'bundle exec'` in your .(bash|zsh)rc file?

or if that's too much use --binstubs to use "bin/rake balls" or if you are really, utterly crazy, use --binstubs AND set $PATH to contain './bin' and then use "rake balls".

You can also use rvm with gemsets and just not use bundle exec at all. I'm amazed how quickly people forget about the things that bundler tries to fix. If you don't have any conflicts across your gems, you can basically use bundler as "just install my gems".

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#89

Post by evilduck »

functionform wrote: post #63
bad_user wrote: post #15

Rails has always been bloated. That's what you get from frameworks that come with automation for common tasks. However, let me provide a counter-point ... I think that Rails 3 is finally a good framework that I want to use. Blogs written in 5 minutes (which you can still do in Rails 3) have never impressed me. What impresses me is code-reuse, modularity and readability. Which is why I preferred Django instead of Rail…

After everyone saw how it easy it was to write your own blog in Rails, everyone ... used Wordpress anyway. The Rails use case was always truly limited. I still don't know any application that achieved maturity and stayed coded in Rails. For a while that was Twitter, but then they started moving stuff over the jvm. Node will probably end up in a similar way, because at the end of the day no one wants to manage thousan…

The "Blog in 5 Minutes" demo was just that, a demo. It was a showcase of how easy it is to create simple CRUD apps in Rails as compared to competing frameworks (or DIY stuff) of that era. Even today, it remains a decent beginner's example that touches on many aspects of MVC.

I don't think you really believe a web development framework and a feature rich blogging product were actual competitors but are simply creating strawmen to support your view. Drop the crap.

Re: Went Off The Rails: Why I'm Rebuilding Archaeopteryx In CoffeeScript

#90

Post by DanI-S »

mtrn wrote: post #60
bad_user wrote: post #15

Rails has always been bloated. That's what you get from frameworks that come with automation for common tasks. However, let me provide a counter-point ... I think that Rails 3 is finally a good framework that I want to use. Blogs written in 5 minutes (which you can still do in Rails 3) have never impressed me. What impresses me is code-reuse, modularity and readability. Which is why I preferred Django instead of Rail…

> Not pursuing hotness is the new hotness IMHO. If you are like this, you'll probably like Knuth's "My advice to young people", http://www.webofstories.com/play/17152 . The relevant part: And I think one of the things that I would, that would sort of come first to me is this idea of, don't just believe that because something is trendy, that it's good. I'd probably go the other extreme where if something, if I find to…

Contrarianism is not an end in itself. If you deliberately take the polar opposite of what is popular, you're following fashion just as much as someone who always has to be using the new hot thing.

How about we just use the tools that allow us to both do a good job and enjoy doing it.

If part of your enjoyment comes from feeling that you're using the optimal modern configuration, that's great. If part of your enjoyment comes from blazing trails with exciting new technology, go for it! If part of your enjoyment comes from using familiar tools in the way you feel most comfortable, that is also sweet.

In all likelihood, when you're building a compelling and performant web application, they will each serve more than adequately.

The idea that "If my work had become too popular I'd probably think I'd have to change" is terribly cynical.

Post reply on HN