The Rails Doctrine

Re:The Rails Doctrine by staticint on Tuesday January 19, 2016 @06:26PM (#10934925)

Having used Rails seriously since it was originally made available as an open source project, I find myself agreeing with you less and less. It has really failed to stand the test of time, in my opinion.

I agree that it nailed the needs of web applications in 2004. If you are still building web applications like they did then, perhaps it is still the best tool. In the circles I find myself in, there is a push for much more Javascript heavy applications and Rails starts to become a large hinderance more than a help in that environment, when compared to other tools.

We've built a log of great software together over the years, but I can honestly say that I'm not going to rush into using it in future projects.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Rails Doctrine by enraged_camel on Tuesday January 19, 2016 @10:52PM (#10935960)

This is a bizarre comment. Rails failed to stand the test of time because it doesn't play very nicely with monolithic JavaScript frameworks? Are you asserting that such frameworks are the future?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Rails Doctrine by gedy on Wednesday January 20, 2016 @12:49AM (#10936278)

I think they are referring to most UI logic being on the client, not on server. That architecture does not require a monolithic JS framework, nor does Rails offer anything special in that case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Rails Doctrine by enraged_camel on Wednesday January 20, 2016 @12:56AM (#10936299)

"Doesn't offer anything special" is quite different than "starts to become a large hindrance."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Rails Doctrine by fierycatnet on Tuesday January 19, 2016 @06:46PM (#10935019)

What are you using then and why is it better than Rails? Just curious.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Rails Doctrine by morenoh149 on Tuesday January 19, 2016 @10:45PM (#10935936)

webpack

[ Parent | on HN ]