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

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#11

Post by nileshtrivedi »

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 Javascript frameworks (like Meteor) will grow in prominence given the promise of code sharing between client and server, better integration with single-page applcation and better libraries for server-side processing.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#12

Post by echoless »

aikah wrote: post #10
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.

> Perhaps there will still be a large demand for sites that aren't SPA applications. Interesting times. It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. > 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…

> It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either.

Currently 99% of websites are not SPAs, but I think a lot of sites will switch to SPAs in the future, since they offer a better UX(no full reloads, more interactivity etc) in most cases. I'm sure customers will demand these sort of sites once they start using more SPAs.

> Why would you need a different framework for a "rest-backend" and a website that displays html?

A full-stack framework is overkill as a backend for SPAs.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#13

Post by aikah »

echoless wrote: post #12
aikah wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps there will still be a large demand for sites that aren't SPA applications. Interesting times. It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. > 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…

> It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. Currently 99% of websites are not SPAs, but I think a lot of sites will switch to SPAs in the future, since they offer a better UX(no full reloads, more interactivity etc) in most cases. I'm sure customers will demand these sort of sites once they start using more SPAs. > Why would you need a differen…

> A full-stack framework is overkill as a backend for SPAs.

A full stack framework doesnt(and shouldnt)force you to use its view layer.I fail to see how it is overkill.

What is overkill is using different frameworks for an app that spits json and an app that spits html.A good framework shouldnt care wether you return one or the other to the client,that's exactly what Rails does.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#14

Post by cageface »

echoless wrote: post #12
aikah wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps there will still be a large demand for sites that aren't SPA applications. Interesting times. It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. > 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…

> It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. Currently 99% of websites are not SPAs, but I think a lot of sites will switch to SPAs in the future, since they offer a better UX(no full reloads, more interactivity etc) in most cases. I'm sure customers will demand these sort of sites once they start using more SPAs. > Why would you need a differen…

but I think a lot of sites will switch to SPAs in the future, since they offer a better UX

Actually I suspect that a lot of these kinds of sites will primarily migrate to native mobile apps.

A full-stack framework is overkill as a backend for SPAs.

I'm not so sure. HTML rendering is a pretty small part of what a complex framework like Rails does. You still need a database/ORM layer, user management and auth, routing, caching, etc. The same things that make Rails productive for traditional web apps also make it pretty nice for building REST APIs.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#15

Post by adamonduty »

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.

Rails works quite nicely as a REST backend. Its also much faster in my experience to render json than HTML templates. Rails is great as a general starting point, letting you choose SPA at the start or later.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#16

Post by josephagoss »

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 was always under the impression that these server based frameworks are better for two reasons, the code is safe, so you're leaking less of your code, and that the size of the website on the client is reduced allowing for faster downloads.

I could be very wrong, but I feel more comfortable keeping as much code on the server as possible.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#17

Post by juliangregorian »

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.

You guys need to learn how turbolinks works. Rails already is basically an SPA framework.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#18

Post by echoless »

juliangregorian wrote: post #17
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.

You guys need to learn how turbolinks works. Rails already is basically an SPA framework.

Turbolinks wipes off the entire DOM and replaces it with the new request's html on link navigation. So no, it is not an adequate replacement for SPAs.

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#19

Post by jedisct1 »

nileshtrivedi wrote: post #11
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 Javascript frameworks (like Meteor) will grow in prominence given the promise of code sharing between client and server, better integration with single-page applcation and better libraries for server-side processing.

Or that compiles to Javascript for the client-side, like Volt (which I have been very impressed by): http://voltframework.com/

Re: “Start Rails 5 development”

#20

Post by jordanthoms »

echoless wrote: post #12
aikah wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps there will still be a large demand for sites that aren't SPA applications. Interesting times. It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. > 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…

> It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. Currently 99% of websites are not SPAs, but I think a lot of sites will switch to SPAs in the future, since they offer a better UX(no full reloads, more interactivity etc) in most cases. I'm sure customers will demand these sort of sites once they start using more SPAs. > Why would you need a differen…

People always seem to prefer Sinatra over Rails for building a SPA backend, because 'rails is overkill'. Then they add Active Record, some autoloader implementation, rspec, caching, sidekiq etc and you end up with a cobbled together version of rails essentially. Rails-API is really nice here, strips out the things you truly don't need for a API in rails but keeps all the other infrastructure.
Post reply on HN