Existential crisis at Railsconf
railsbird.tumblr.com
Existential crisis at Railsconf
1–10 of 168 posts
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#2Could this be formalized? Have odd releases as "feature" releases and even releases as Snow Leopard-style "consolidation" releases?
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#3No, Rails isn't great for web socket kinds of things, but if it were me, I'd just use something else for that, and Rails for the main site. It's still one of the best things out there for quickly iterating, and yet still maintaining some structure and discipline, from what I've seen.
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#4No, Rails isn't great for web socket kinds of things, but if it were me, I'd just use something else for that, and Rails for the main site. It's still one of the best things out there for quickly iterating, and yet still maintaining some structure and discipline, from what I've seen.
Same here, i see it this way: use the right tool, for the right job. Sometimes it's Ruby/Rails, sometimes it's Node, somtimes it's something else.
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#5In web framework terms, Rails is old. When it was created single-page applications weren't on anyone's radar, APIs were extremely uncommon, and websockets hadn't been invented. It's natural to expect some pain try to adapt new paradigms into the old model. Whether this pain is worth it is up to the individual to decide. My web applications are almost always pure client-side these days, so Rails is not something I often turn to.
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#6LOL at the idea that every Rails programmer will be switching to Clojure or Elixir! While they might be interesting languages (particularly Elixir) I don't see any 10x advantages their web stacks have over Rails for the typical "majestic monolith" use case.
Re. EventMachine: As I understood DHH's speech, the idea is that ActionCable abstracts all the messiness around EventMachine, Websockets, Rack and threads. We won't know until some ActionCable code is released but it sure didn't look complicated.
It does seem odd that -api takes years to get in, but ActionCable gets a go-straight-to-core pass without any community review first. It certainly seems like a weakness in the process, which should be addressed, although I'd agree with the eventual result & priorities. -api probably isn't something I'd ever use: even if I eventually created an API-only app, I'd probably have started from a regular Rails app and gradually optimised things out.
Edited to add: I'm actually quite bullish on TurboLinks 3 if it can help me to avoid ever having to write a Javascript MVC app again. It's not so much that these apps are hard to write, it's that they're freaking hard to debug, particularly in the hands of users.
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#7For those wondering what the alternatives to Rails are these days, I highly recommend checking out Elixir and the Phoenix framework.
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#8In web framework terms, Rails is old. When it was created single-page applications weren't on anyone's radar, APIs were extremely uncommon, and websockets hadn't been invented. It's natural to expect some pain try to adapt new paradigms into the old model. Whether this pain is worth it is up to the individual to decide. My web applications are almost always pure client-side these days, so Rails is not something I oft…
Re "In web framework terms, Rails is old"
Oh how I love that! I would rather build my business on something old and well testet then something new and shiny.
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#9Forget rails. Move to Django ;)
Re: Existential crisis at Railsconf
#10> as developers flock to new technologies like Clojure and Elixir
Is that really the case? Clojure and Elixir?