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

The One-Person Framework in Practice

link.mail.beehiiv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 172 posts

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#141

Post by gwbas1c »

> Every experienced developer knows: never do a full rewrite.

> The rewrite took a couple of intense months, during which I maintained the existing application while building its replacement.

Having been through a rewrite in the past: You made the right decision. If a rewrite really is only a couple of intense months, it's worth it.

Otherwise, when your application gets into the "full of bad practices"; the alternative is to do major refactors.

I suspect that the application was small enough that the rewrite made more sense than a refactor.

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#142

Post by AstroBen »

dismalaf wrote: post #123
AstroBen wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wish Ruby had something with the widespread adoption of TypeScript. Once a project gets large enough it's really painful not having types Sorbet and RBS are okay but they don't really compare

Why? No one's stopping you from, say, using a Rails API and React front end.

Because I would prefer the Rails side to have good support for static typing

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#143

Post by marcosdumay »

sethammons wrote: post #83
Maledictus wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I moved from PHP to Ruby (and Rails), I discovered how much fun programming can be. Ruby just optimizes for the right thing, Developer happiness.

I have heard that for years and I just don't get it. Magic abounds. The test assertions and testing libraries are whole DSLs that require a separate/additional learning process with inconsistent chaining with inconsistent return types. Being able to overwrite anything in the language gives rise to things like unicode whitespace being misinterpreted as an undefined function. You can define methods by combining method…

As much as I really hate the Ruby magic, I have to say, it's always about doing the right thing, at the right time, for the right purpose. Even more on the kind of magic Rails use.

I personally can't handle it. It's completely frustrating. Nothings documents what your system is doing, and nobody on the community seems to have an inch of clue about what exactly is happening on their computers. But you can't deny that it works, and works well... unless you need to override something due to a niche use-case.

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#144

Post by banashark »

dimitrisnl wrote: post #112
hi_hi wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, dealing with auth can be painful. The adonis provided auth and bouncer do a decent job of abstracting some of that away, but like most js implementations, it's got rough edges (the docs and vids really help). I'm not familiar with Elixir/Phoenix, but from reading other recommendations in this thread and after having a quick look, I need to take a closer look :-)

Is there a 1st party auth package? I can't remember any - They were guiding you to the adoniscasts videos, which some are paid. Very hard to get traction like this.

https://docs.adonisjs.com/guides/authentication/introduction

"AdonisJS ships with a robust and secure authentication system you can use to log in and authenticate users of your application. Be it a server-rendered application, a SPA client, or a mobile app, you can set up authentication for all of them."

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#145

Post by Lukas_Skywalker »

sethammons wrote: post #83
Maledictus wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I moved from PHP to Ruby (and Rails), I discovered how much fun programming can be. Ruby just optimizes for the right thing, Developer happiness.

I have heard that for years and I just don't get it. Magic abounds. The test assertions and testing libraries are whole DSLs that require a separate/additional learning process with inconsistent chaining with inconsistent return types. Being able to overwrite anything in the language gives rise to things like unicode whitespace being misinterpreted as an undefined function. You can define methods by combining method…

I always thought it was funny that people criticize the "magic" of certain frameworks, when at its core, almost all programming is magic (since it is almost always an abstraction). And there is probably no clear distinction on where non-magic ends and magic starts.

But somehow, no one complains about having a GC instead of needing to use `malloc`/`free` or `fetch` doing the DNS query automatically.

And that's exactly _why_ I use frameworks and libraries. So I don't have to write low level code, or as one could call it, to use some magic.

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#146

Post by turboladen »

pphysch wrote: post #128
dismalaf wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> , it would be a hard sell to invest in Ruby ecosystem instead of Python Why? The Ruby ecosystem is great, as good as ever. What do you think it's missing?

Mass adoption in domains beyond just backend webdev. Python is increasingly the lingua franca of data . Ruby ecosystem is great, but it's not Python great.

Each to their own of course, and not arguing that the Ruby ecosystem is amazing (although I thought so in 2008), with Python’s eleventy different package managers, I wouldn’t call the ecosystem great. It’s one of the main reasons I get bummed out having to use the language. Sure there’s lots of work going on to improve that, but it’s still smattered all over the place.

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#147

Post by dismalaf »

AstroBen wrote: post #142
dismalaf wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? No one's stopping you from, say, using a Rails API and React front end.

Because I would prefer the Rails side to have good support for static typing

Just curious, why?

I like static typing when it gives me a 100x speedup (Java, C++, Haskell, whatever), but not solely for the sake of it...

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#148

Post by SirSavary »

swyx wrote: post #126
searls wrote: post #44

For anyone who's ducked out of Rails World over the last decade (or two), I devoted my final conference talk last year to the topic of One-Person Framework with a real-world case study of how Rails 7+ specifically helps developers build ambitious apps, even as a solo developer. https://justin.searls.co/tubes/2024-11-09-11h03m00s/

final as in you're out of talks for now?? i clicked thru but saw no obvious explanation of what change you're making for those a bit out of the loop

from searls' link:

> The presentation summarizes a year of my work but it also embeds countless little things life taught me over the 15 years since I started speaking at user groups and regional conferences.

> But this chapter of my life has now concluded. I'm excited to be moving on to other things.

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#149

Post by gwbas1c »

> Our new partners, while fans of our lean approach, had one non-negotiable requirement: adding another Rails developer to the team.

> The code represented not just PlanGo's evolution, but my own journey from a beginner to a more experienced developer. Parts of the codebase contained decisions made by different versions of myself, with varying levels of experience and understanding.

I've joined a few companies where the codebase was started by a (cough) inexperienced developer. The hardest thing is always breaking down someone's ego about their code. The most challenging is when a person in power needs rather (cough) forceful convincing that something needs to change.

One thing I'd be curious about are situations where Jetten had to let his ego go and learn from his co-worker.

Needless to say, in my other comment in this thread, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43836305 I didn't "fight" the battle against the rewrite. But I did fight, and win, the battle to remove a very poorly designed ORM.

Re: The One-Person Framework in Practice

#150

Post by AstroBen »

dismalaf wrote: post #147
AstroBen wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I would prefer the Rails side to have good support for static typing

Just curious, why? I like static typing when it gives me a 100x speedup (Java, C++, Haskell, whatever), but not solely for the sake of it...

I get the most value from it when it comes to refactoring
Post reply on HN