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

Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 86 posts

Re: Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

#41

Post by cmelbye »

csytan wrote: post #29

Google Appengine: Probably _the_ easiest platform to develop a webapp on if you use Python and are okay with its limitations. Tornado: If you are going to develop on GAE, Tornado is the way to go. It is fast, well written, and only includes the core features needed for a web app. I can't highlight how much easier it has made things for me since switching from Django. Debugging Tornado's source code was a breath of fr…

It's a real shame that App Engine doesn't support long running requests that Tornado is great at serving, but I definitely agree with you. Platform as a Service is such a breath of fresh air. Heroku is also a great choice for Ruby.

Re: Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

#42

Post by yummyfajitas »

Rabbitmq (and AMQP in general). It's just simple, straightforward message passing.

My C++ process creates a queue, and binds it to the key "yummyfajitastasks". My python process (a django webapp, in this case) sends messages with the key "yummyfajitastasks". My c++ process receives them, does work, sends messages back.

Combine this with JSON or some serialization method and you've almost got erlang style messaging, except you can write part of your code in python, part in C++, part in ruby, etc.

Re: Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

#43

Post by cmelbye »

I've loved playing with Heroku and I'm excited to deploy my real project to it once we finish a stable version of it.

I've also liked working with Rails, because it has made things like i18n, testing, and implementing new features so much easier.

Finally, I've enjoyed using beanstalkd for my message queue. It's tiny and fast and it just stays out of the way. I'm using a new library I made called Peon (based off of an AMQP-based library called Minion) and it's a really easy, scalable way to bring long running tasks into the background.

Re: Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

#44

Post by notauser »

jazzychad wrote: post #23

Node.js. Event driven I/O is so so sweet. I have sharpened my javascript fu over the last year or so, and being able to bring it server-side is surprisingly fun and easy.

I really enjoyed playing with it, but I think it won't shine until higher level libraries are ported/written for it.

There are basic URL dispatchers and template systems, but nothing as battle-tested as Django (yet).

Easy access to streaming data was pretty nice! As is the event system but I'm afraid as a mostly client-side programmer I take that for granted.

Re: Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

#48

Post by chipsy »

Software technology: I spent most of my time implementing my own tools and tech using haXe, Leo, wxPython, SQLite. haXe+Leo is an amazing combination for maintaining code.

Not a software technology: http://www.c-thru-music.com/cgi/?page=prod_axis-49

This thing is amazing, especially if you aren't already an experienced keyboardist; it makes all the note relationships easier to learn so you get to the "fun" part of playing faster.

Re: Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year?

#50

Post by sorbits »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #42

Rabbitmq (and AMQP in general). It's just simple, straightforward message passing. My C++ process creates a queue, and binds it to the key "yummyfajitastasks". My python process (a django webapp, in this case) sends messages with the key "yummyfajitastasks". My c++ process receives them, does work, sends messages back. Combine this with JSON or some serialization method and you've almost got erlang style messaging, e…

You suffix both C++ and Python with process, this makes me question how this is any different than using a socket?
Post reply on HN