DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
1–10 of 135 posts
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#2Its DHH, not DDH. Mods, please update the title.
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#3It's always important to study history :)
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#4This reinforces what I see a lot too - people creating yet another XYZ, but rarely I see someone go and create an integrated solution to streamline development processes or make things easier or clearer.
There are a lot of vocal people who make it seem like you should be doing everything in Go or Angular or what have you, but I want nothing to do with either, and do not have problems that those are meant to solve. I love ruby, and I love rails.
DHH regularly sounds the drum of rationality - in a community at large of idealists and extremists. He is the reason I got into programming, and constantly serves to remind me that what I'm doing is, in fact, perfectly fine; and that everyone else puts up with a lot of nonsense for no great reason.
There are other frameworks out there, but you'd be hard pressed to find one with a leader that has such a sense of direction and reason for why the framework does what it does, and does not.
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#5I admire the way DHH writes .. confident and persuasive.
However, I'd just like to point out that in the same span of time JavaEE has undergone significant simplification (omakase API standards, anyone ;)) and if you check out the work of Adam Bien, you'll quickly find old myths of bloated memory consumption and fiddly XML configuration debunked.
Java is also lucky to have a parallel full-featured stack in the Spring ecosystem. Projects like JHipster do an opinionated take on how to wire things up and take you to quickly to orbit.
So basically, I disagree with DHH that there is "Very little activity in integrated solutions."
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#6Rails, as any backend system such as Drupal or Symfony, is inevitably a dead end technology.
The web is increasingly moving frontend and the system of 2018 onwards will simply be the M in MVC.
Note, I'm not saying Rails is not worth learning. I'm just saying it's now the Cobol of web technology.
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#7So, I have seen rails code and I did not fall in love with the code. Instead what I saw just black magic and all sorts of conventions. Reminded me of perl. You have to invest a lot of time knowing all the magic stuff.
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#8Rails, as any backend system such as Drupal or Symfony, is inevitably a dead end technology. The web is increasingly moving frontend and the system of 2018 onwards will simply be the M in MVC. Note, I'm not saying Rails is not worth learning. I'm just saying it's now the Cobol of web technology.
Can you provide examples of the move you describe?
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#9Rails, as any backend system such as Drupal or Symfony, is inevitably a dead end technology. The web is increasingly moving frontend and the system of 2018 onwards will simply be the M in MVC. Note, I'm not saying Rails is not worth learning. I'm just saying it's now the Cobol of web technology.
If I read your comment correctly, I believe you are suggesting that backends will provide APIs, which would leave us with the MC in MVC, the controller is still needed to map data structures to API endpoints.
My question to you is this: why do you believe that? I think we have all witnessed a growth in popularity in front-end MVC frameworks, but are they the correct solution to all problems?
Re: DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?
#10So, I have seen rails code and I did not fall in love with the code. Instead what I saw just black magic and all sorts of conventions. Reminded me of perl. You have to invest a lot of time knowing all the magic stuff.
What's wrong with conventions? It seems to me that code conventions would make code more maintainable.