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

“Start Rails 5 development”

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 67 posts

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#41

Post by bshimmin »

dgregd wrote: post #28
dgregd wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ruby on Rails is still the most productive why to build web apps. Turbolinks prolonged Rails life cycle, as the best web framework, by two or three years. However SPA are the future. Maybe Angular 2 will be good enough to switch. Maybe something build after Angular 2.

Would you please explain why my comment have been down-voted?

Probably because you haven't really provided any supporting evidence for your conclusions. Always show your working out. (Also, for many people, the first thing they do on a Rails project is disable Turbolinks.)

I actually happen to agree that Rails is still a supremely productive way to build certain types of web sites and/or applications. An experienced Rails guy, leveraging the vast array of gems out there which can solve many different problems with just a few lines of code, can get an MVP out of the door extremely quickly.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#42

Post by tragic »

nona wrote: post #30
tragic wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works both ways though: I suspect that maybe most people on starting a rails project rip out half the gemfile as soon as 'rails new' has finished. Or they have their own skeleton projects with preferences already sorted out (rails api being a high point of the genre). Deconstructing a web framework isn't necessarily better than reconstructing one.

I'd beg to differ: at the very least it provides hints and conventions on common, useful, well-integrated gems. The Sinatra apps I've seen that had gotten a bit fatter over time tended to be all over the place, dependencies and quality wise (some good, mind you); whereas the deconstructed rails apps tended to be very similar, and easy for other developers to get up to speed with. It's a small advantage, but it's enou…

Yeah, I'm partly playing devil's advocate: for my day job I work with node, doing microservice-y stuff; on my own time, I prefer working with a Django or Rails type framework.

I appreciate the benefits of a 'batteries included' approach when, realistically, anything I build on my own is not going to have to horizontally scale across 50 EC2 boxes, although some of Rails's choices in terms of batteries are peculiar to me.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#43

Post by sandstrom »

echoless wrote: post #7

I'm curious about the fate of Rails(and other frameworks like Django) in a few years, seeing that many web applications are moving to the Single-Page-Application model and the server simply acts as a rest backend. Perhaps there will still be a large demand for sites that aren't SPA applications. Interesting times.

I think Rails is great for API-only backends too.

I'd say it's quite common to have clients in JS/iOS/Android, and still use a Rails-backend.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#44

Post by nes350 »

bshimmin wrote: post #40
mratzloff wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For over a decade I've heard that SPA and server-side JavaScript is the future. I always believed JavaScript would carve out a place on the server side, but I've always been skeptical about SPA given the often terrible UX and SEO. And besides that, most sites are better off being served statically from a cache. tl;dr Wake me up when even 5% of sites are SPA.

Where on earth were you hearing about SPAs and server-side JavaScript in 2004? Was "SPA" even a term before about 2010?

Probably he doesn't mean only JavaScript SPAs. The term was introduced around 2010, but the concept is older. Flex is from ~2004 and is typically used for SPAs which behave like the modern JavaScript applications - they just target the Flash platform instead.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#45

Post by megaman821 »

echoless wrote: post #7

I'm curious about the fate of Rails(and other frameworks like Django) in a few years, seeing that many web applications are moving to the Single-Page-Application model and the server simply acts as a rest backend. Perhaps there will still be a large demand for sites that aren't SPA applications. Interesting times.

The browser is becoming more of a platform to deploy to like Android or iOS, instead of a document viewer. I think it is still the wild wild west on the client side for now, but once winners emerge there will be a much larger group of developers creating SPA's. It seems Angular 2.0, Ember 2.0, and React 1.0 are all headed in similar directions with their emphasis on components, so a winning concept might emerge some time soon. That said, development trends on the web slowly play out over years. I expect Rails and Django to have a massive user base for 5+ years at least.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#46

Post by r-s »

ragecore wrote: post #3

I think it's shipping with its own background processor, Active Jobs. Sounds good!

Active Jobs, at least how implemented in 4.2 is not its own background processor. Its just a common api for using the background processor of your choice (Sidekiq, Resque, Delayed job etc).

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#47

Post by scoot »

tinco wrote: post #27
digitalzombie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing web dev for 6 years, full stack, back and front, mostly somewhere in the middle and front end. From what I've seen, backend rendering ain't going no where. This SPA trends is still wild west. Angular 1 is kind slowing down imo cause of the drastic changes in Angular 2. Ember is bloat. The javascript eco system is meh right now. NodeJS people probably will argue against this. But seriously, javascript…

Not to one-up you, just since apparently it's worth mentioning, I've been doing webdev for about 9 years, and at least from my perspective backend rendering is definitely going out the window. I started as a Rails dev in 2008, did ASP.Net before that, and last year I've moved from Rails to a pimped up Grape, which is a framework suited more for developing API's. Maybe it's just the sort of apps I'm building (basicall…

Is this stack something you'd consider documenting? Coming from Rails, but increasingly moving towards SPAs with Rails as the API (hard to give up all the OOTB niceties), this sounds intriguing.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#48

Post by aikah »

bshimmin wrote: post #40
mratzloff wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For over a decade I've heard that SPA and server-side JavaScript is the future. I always believed JavaScript would carve out a place on the server side, but I've always been skeptical about SPA given the often terrible UX and SEO. And besides that, most sites are better off being served statically from a cache. tl;dr Wake me up when even 5% of sites are SPA.

Where on earth were you hearing about SPAs and server-side JavaScript in 2004? Was "SPA" even a term before about 2010?

It used to be called Ria,"rich internet applications".Then ajax apps before...nothing new here.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#49

Post by aikah »

dgregd wrote: post #28
dgregd wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ruby on Rails is still the most productive why to build web apps. Turbolinks prolonged Rails life cycle, as the best web framework, by two or three years. However SPA are the future. Maybe Angular 2 will be good enough to switch. Maybe something build after Angular 2.

Would you please explain why my comment have been down-voted?

Maybe because Angular is a client-side framework and doesnt come with its own server.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#50

Post by jonnii »

tinco wrote: post #27
digitalzombie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing web dev for 6 years, full stack, back and front, mostly somewhere in the middle and front end. From what I've seen, backend rendering ain't going no where. This SPA trends is still wild west. Angular 1 is kind slowing down imo cause of the drastic changes in Angular 2. Ember is bloat. The javascript eco system is meh right now. NodeJS people probably will argue against this. But seriously, javascript…

Not to one-up you, just since apparently it's worth mentioning, I've been doing webdev for about 9 years, and at least from my perspective backend rendering is definitely going out the window. I started as a Rails dev in 2008, did ASP.Net before that, and last year I've moved from Rails to a pimped up Grape, which is a framework suited more for developing API's. Maybe it's just the sort of apps I'm building (basicall…

When you say "Ember seems to do too much", can you give me an example? I'm interested in understanding why it has this reputation of being bloated.
Post reply on HN