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

Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 248 posts

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#91

Post by jupp0r »

gv83 wrote: post #70
jupp0r wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your model of companies using Rails with 1000s of engineers is almost comically naive. Look at what Shopify and Github have to do to make Rails work for them. Also look at the non Ruby code engineers there are writing and ask yourself why they might be doing it. Rails is not a religion. It can be good at what it does without having to go on a crusade when people point out its substantial limitations.

you're seriously convinced they would have had no problems if they chose something else? every codebase that lasts that long and is used that much is going to face very hard challenges as it scales and meets new landmarks. the maintainable codebase from day 1 to day 5000 is (mostly) a myth. yeah maybe some other stack could have faced different tradeoffs. I'm also curious about YOUR choice of stack at this point.

I never said that some other stack wouldn't have problems. My point was that Rails is great at some problems and awful at others. No idea how this can be controversial at all. My impression seems to be that there is a group of fanboys that are not able to have any intelligent conversation on what their favorite tool is good for and what it's not good for.

In my day job I use mostly Rails. My team is starting to rewrite some of the services we own in Golang because Rails is no longer a good fit for the problems and scale we use it for. Rails was great to get started fast.

Nothing wrong with using a press instead of a hammer at some point, they are just tools.

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#92

Post by jupp0r »

mosselman wrote: post #68
jupp0r wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your model of companies using Rails with 1000s of engineers is almost comically naive. Look at what Shopify and Github have to do to make Rails work for them. Also look at the non Ruby code engineers there are writing and ask yourself why they might be doing it. Rails is not a religion. It can be good at what it does without having to go on a crusade when people point out its substantial limitations.

If your reverse your comment you could say “only when your reach 100s of developers will you need to start changing things a bit.” Sounds good to me. Most companies never reach that scale and if they do, I think investing into some extras will be well worth it. Tobi looks pretty chill about it in the documentary.

Totally, Rails is a great tool. So is my gunsmith hammer. I can like it for what it does without arguing it's the best thing in the world for cutting wood or joining two pieces of metal together.

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#93

Post by butlike »

larksimian wrote: post #30
berkes wrote: post #17

> if you open up any Rails application, it looks basically the same in structure whether it is the biggest Rails app there is or a new one. I used to love this, untill I started to hate it. I am convinced this is a major contributor to why so many Rails apps turn into an unmaintainable mess over years. Who measures onboarding in hours? It's fine if it takes a day or two to understand the domain. And the framework. An…

You're building CRUD apps. The conventions work and are extensible for teams of 1, 10, 100 and 1000s. You are not special and neither is your product. Companies making millions or billions of dollars have used this framework successfully. This level of bike-shedding is what makes conventions necessary especially when dealing with the typical hyper-pedantic software developer. Just the thought of having to debate wher…

I don't think it's necessarily bike shedding, and actually a lot of the sentiments resonated with me. Rails is a tool that does a tool's job. It's nice to know a hammer does hammer things when you're expecting it. If you need a level, maybe use a different tool. I think the main issue is everyone expecting it to be "one-size fits all." It was never meant to be that, really

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#94

Post by vario »

sleight42 wrote: post #84
vario wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

his 'artsyness' was the main reason I avoided learning Ruby for years-- wrongly thinking people who code in Ruby speak like him. I know this is a possibly unpopular opinion but I don't think one should glorify a sophomoric book as a key Ruby book-- there are others that deserve that title, PickAxe is close, but I'd have liked a book like Whittaker's "C#, Player Guide" for Ruby.

Perhaps Ruby isn't for you then? Matz's intent was and has been to bring joy and delight to developers, with the odd combination of PERL, LISP, and Smalltalk as his inspirations. Joy and delight don't necessarily equate with "most practical". But joy and delight are wonderful and healthful qualities to cultivate for a good life! _why embodied much of the spirit of the (at least earlier) Ruby community. We were softwa…

[flagged]

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#95

Post by butlike »

breakfastduck wrote: post #69
larksimian wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're building CRUD apps. The conventions work and are extensible for teams of 1, 10, 100 and 1000s. You are not special and neither is your product. Companies making millions or billions of dollars have used this framework successfully. This level of bike-shedding is what makes conventions necessary especially when dealing with the typical hyper-pedantic software developer. Just the thought of having to debate wher…

This is part of the problem with your claim - many of us are not building CRUD apps, we are building complex enterprise software and there are unique challenges to solve.

Then I think the focus should be on the API. At enterprise level, the API becomes the language, and the frameworks (and even departments to an extent) become the functions/methods.

Business = program

Company = class (business can be a conglomerate)

Department = method

frameworks = implementation details

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#96

Post by lagniappe »

vario wrote: post #94
sleight42 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps Ruby isn't for you then? Matz's intent was and has been to bring joy and delight to developers, with the odd combination of PERL, LISP, and Smalltalk as his inspirations. Joy and delight don't necessarily equate with "most practical". But joy and delight are wonderful and healthful qualities to cultivate for a good life! _why embodied much of the spirit of the (at least earlier) Ruby community. We were softwa…

[flagged]

> Typical deficit in reading comprehension is the hallmark of the mediocre mind.

Are you insulting the person who responded to your comment?

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#97

Post by spaceywilly »

game_the0ry wrote: post #73

I tried to like ruby and rails, but when I tried to grok the language, I found it more difficult to follow than python + js (my daily drivers). Did anyone else feel the same way? I kind of want to give it another chance bc I have some side projects that I want to try out, but I find django/python and next/react easier to grok. Maybe I should try harder? FWIW, I also want to pick up good practices when it comes to eng…

Honestly, if you only are familiar with Python, it’s gonna be pretty tough to learn anything else. I would recommend spending some time learning literally any other language (Ruby is fine). Otherwise, if you just know Python, I think it will hold you back.

For example, ending an if statement with semicolon and then having the if block indented below is just not the normal way to do things. I’m not knocking Python, I use it all the time and it’s great, but it’s not a language you can carry over to learning other languages. It’s like if you know English, it’s pretty easy to learn Spanish. But if you only know Chinese, it’s going to be tougher to learn an “English-ish” language. Hope that makes sense.

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#98

Post by jen20 »

arnvald wrote: post #77
jupp0r wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your model of companies using Rails with 1000s of engineers is almost comically naive. Look at what Shopify and Github have to do to make Rails work for them. Also look at the non Ruby code engineers there are writing and ask yourself why they might be doing it. Rails is not a religion. It can be good at what it does without having to go on a crusade when people point out its substantial limitations.

Is there any comparably complete framework that does not need any significant adjustments even when it's used by 1000s of developers building the same app?

Probably ASP.NET is as close as it gets.

Re: Ruby on Rails: The Documentary [video]

#100

Post by sleight42 »

vario wrote: post #94
sleight42 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps Ruby isn't for you then? Matz's intent was and has been to bring joy and delight to developers, with the odd combination of PERL, LISP, and Smalltalk as his inspirations. Joy and delight don't necessarily equate with "most practical". But joy and delight are wonderful and healthful qualities to cultivate for a good life! _why embodied much of the spirit of the (at least earlier) Ruby community. We were softwa…

[flagged]

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Sure, Ruby is for anyone who wants to use it.

Post reply on HN