Am I the only one who perceives minimal value from slideshare. Without context, slides are pretty useless. I'm not saying Yehuda's presentation wasn't good. I did not see his presentation. I am saying, the slides have little value without an explanation of the slides.
Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
41–50 of 52 posts
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#42Looks really cool. It's definitely not cool though that Yehuda's keeps saying things like "Sinatra has failed because...", and "because Prototype sucks..." and so on. I'm only half way through the video, but it really bothers me when smart software developers disparage other open source projects that came before the latest shiny framework or tool. Especially when it's to brag about whatever project it is that they're…
Yehuda didn't simply say that Sinatra failed. What he said was that Sinatra (and other similar projects) failed to achieve a critical mass of support. The reason for this failure was because these projects were trying to do fundamentally different things than what most people were actually doing with Rails at the time, and as a result, they didn't catch on. This statement was made in comparison to merb, which succeed…
One thing I've learned over the years is that there is a certain level of tact one needs to have when talking about other peoples' work. It's very easy for people to be offended when you talk about things they've worked on negatively. As I've matured as a software engineer I've come to realize that no, my code is not a beautiful unique snowflake, and yes, I am probably the dumbest guy in the room.
This means that generally I've shifted from the thinking "this other person's code is shit" to "I'm betting there was a reason they did it this way." As it turns out, there almost always is. With the benefit of hindsight, those reasons can sometimes seem foolish, but that's the thing about hindsight. More often than not though, once I take the time to understand them, the decisions of the original author turn out to be better than my knee-jerk response.
When your overall attitude is still in the "everyone else's code sucks" mindset it leaks out through your language, and I think that's what is happening here, however slightly. There is no reason to use the word "failed" or use the word "sucks" when talking about another person's work, particularly when it's work that people are using in production for free and work that is open sourced, like Sinatra or Prototype. Even moreso when you're promoting an iteration of improvements on a platform that benefits from the work and experience of many man-months of volunteers, an iteration that is still not even released yet.
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#43So if you're new to rails, is it better to learn rails 2.x and move to 3.0 later, or to just learn 3.0 now?
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#44Are these benchmarks for real? Is there a 1.8.6 vs 1.9 thing happening here?
(to answer my own question: yes, there's a 1.9 thing happening here).
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's definitely not cool though that Yehuda's keeps saying things like "Sinatra has failed because..." Agreed. That's apples and oranges! Rails and Sinatra are different tools for different problems, IMO.
> That's apples and oranges! Rails and Sinatra are different tools for different problems, IMO. Actually no. With rails3, rails will just be a meta gem. If you install rails-core you'll get something like Rack plus not much more which is basically what sinatra is.
Ah, looks like I have some Rails 3 learnin' to do! Thanks! :)
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is probably a lively discussion or possibly a flamewar to be had on your topic. Unfortunately, it is totally unrelated to the topic of this thread. If you want to talk about this other thing, why not post it on a blog and submit to HN?
I have posted this type of thing all over the internet. Sometimes I get flamed, usually I just get ignored. I was hoping maybe people that were on top of Rails development might be different. I was wrong.
[deleted]
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#47Rails 3 is waayy faster and better then. Rails in general is great. Its really got the abstraction thing and taking into consideration crazy things like developments in software engineering practices and programming languages. Having said that, I don't really know much about Rails. This comment is not about Rails. I just have to tell people because I keep thinking about something and almost no one seems to get it and…
There is probably a lively discussion or possibly a flamewar to be had on your topic. Unfortunately, it is totally unrelated to the topic of this thread. If you want to talk about this other thing, why not post it on a blog and submit to HN?
Here is where I posted it on a blog and submitted it to HN 230 days ago. It received like 0 upvotes and 1 comment that didn't say much of anything. 2D programming via composed code-generating widgets
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=569349
Is there an online multiuser environment for coding/interacting with widgets? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=670228
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#48Rails 3 is waayy faster and better then. Rails in general is great. Its really got the abstraction thing and taking into consideration crazy things like developments in software engineering practices and programming languages. Having said that, I don't really know much about Rails. This comment is not about Rails. I just have to tell people because I keep thinking about something and almost no one seems to get it and…
This reminds me of the Atlas connections interface. (see screencast: http://280atlas.com/what.php ) How does that compare to your vision?
Right, binding properties on components to other components' properties or to code through visual drag-and-drop operations is the right direction I think. I would like to go further, with finer-grained components, all the way down to the code level, so even when we are building components, we are building them out of interactive two-dimensional widgets/models or something. I think it would be easier to interact with branching statements, function calls or classes or some more appropriate abstraction using some type of two-dimensional interactive widgets rather than having to type code.
Also, I am not sure what the best approach is, but I think we can go beyond even the ability to connect properties on components. Not sure if it needs to be as complex as projectional editors like Intentional Software is creating or if maybe in some ways that might be more complex than we want. Here is one idea I had awhile ago. (Just an idea, certainly doesn't represent a vision or anything http://ilaksh.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/2d-programming-via-co...)
I also think that real-time collaborative environments are a huge boost.
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#49Rails 3 is waayy faster and better then. Rails in general is great. Its really got the abstraction thing and taking into consideration crazy things like developments in software engineering practices and programming languages. Having said that, I don't really know much about Rails. This comment is not about Rails. I just have to tell people because I keep thinking about something and almost no one seems to get it and…
That way lie frameworks such as Visual Studio, Visual Studio, Delphi, PowerBuilder, Oracle Developer, SQL Server Studio, various CASE tools, etc. All good products that remind us that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. While often excellent, these frameworks usually disappear (or morph to new incompatible forms) within a decade leaving behind cast-off skeletons, the underlying code they generated, to be…
Tools like PowerBuilder etc. are enhanced over time and evolve. The old applications built with those tools have to be either maintained with the old versions of the tools or converted/ported to the newer platforms. Oftentimes the underlying source code is using older libraries also and quite possibly outdated language features.
I'm not sure I have ever really sought security in any particular programming language or version. Also, when you say "the programming language level" -- some languages evolve very quickly, and from one project to the next, even though it is basically the "same" language sometimes requires developers to learn very different ways of doing things. C (from procedural to object-oriented) or C# and its rapid changes are examples.
Since we are starting with the machine hardware level there must be some route from the representation closest to the problem domain to that level. So we generate code for the next lowest level. A 4GL editor generates 3GL code and 3GL compiler generates 2GL code and a 2GL assembler generates 1GL (machine) code.
I guess I don't feel like the 4GL (or call them 5GL if you want) tools have the capabilities we need to be able to throw out the 3GL, and I want to throw it out, or at least use it much, much less.
Re: Rails 3 : Vaporware To Awesome
#50Rails 3 is waayy faster and better then. Rails in general is great. Its really got the abstraction thing and taking into consideration crazy things like developments in software engineering practices and programming languages. Having said that, I don't really know much about Rails. This comment is not about Rails. I just have to tell people because I keep thinking about something and almost no one seems to get it and…
One thing to push this forward would be to have a standard set of visual "atoms". Right now text editors all share the same "atoms", which are characters. If there were a standard set of visual atoms then you would get generic visual editors and there would be more reason to work within this shared visual language.