Ruby on Rails

[drunknbass]

ive just stumbled across this.. i know imlate.. but has anyone used this to design anything worth while?

[cougrhky20]

yes

[argonauta]

no

[atRax]

[aversion]

It can be, I think it depends on your development preferences. I don't use it.

[drunknbass]

just wondering if anyone has examples in a real life situation where someone would benifit using this over php or something else.

[gesteves]

Cork'd is a nice example of a Rails app.

[drunknbass]

but what about this site cant be done with a diff language.. is there something special? i dont know how much code it took to make this looking at it so its hard to form an opinion just looking at a site someone made without the creator talking about it.. ya know what i mean

[argonauta]

for what I've heard, ruby on rails lets you create a site way quicker than just php. Remember, it isn't a programming language, it is a framework written in ruby, which is a programming language.

So, with that said, using a framework lets you create an application faster, but also may force you to its own limitations. Just like if you were using the Zend Framework for php.

I suggest you read this:
http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pa...AtTheBeginning
and follow some tutorials: http://www.rubyonrails.org/screencasts

For what I've heard, you can write a ruby on rails app with way less lines of code than by creating the same app in php. On of the problems that it is supposed to have is scalability.

Why is it becoming popular? because it's easy, fast, and has scriptaculous incorporporated. Scriptaculous is a javascript library to create javascript effects, add xmlhttprequest functionality to your scripts, etc...meaning, ajax, and it's trendy because web 2.0 is about ajax (not only,but they go together, usually).

I would recommend you learn it and use it. The more tools you have in your toolbox is better for you. As long as you don't become obsessive about it, and want to do everything with rails, but analize what's the best tool for the app you need to develop.

Remember that a site coded in php can also look and work the same as one made in coldfusion, asp, jsp... so, it doesn't matter what language you choose, as long as you feel comfortable with it, and your client wants that type of backend.

[gesteves]

but what about this site cant be done with a diff language..

Nothing. You could probably do the exact same site with PHP, it will just take you a bit more time and with more code. Once I got past the learning curve I found I could do a lot more in Rails in less time, since there are conventions and helpers for pretty much everything.

If you're interested in learning, I recommend this book: Agile Web Development with Rails. That's probably all you'll need to learn Rails.

[aversion]

Yeah, Ruby can't do things that PHP etc can't, think of it more like the components for flash, it's still just actionscript and some graphics but it's actionscript and graphics you don't (or perhaps can't) make.

There are quite a few different sorts of 'component' approaches to HTTP web development. Some don't require you to buy into a whole system like RoR. It can be something as relatively simple as the 'Prototype' javascript, which I find really useful.

[jAQUAN]

I suggest you read this:
http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pa...AtTheBeginning

omg thank y ou argo. I was really in the dark before that article. Now I'm totally psyched about it.

[kortex]

My brother actually runs a site devoted to RoR dev with flex and AS 3.

http://flexonrails.net/

From what he has shown me, ruby really makes it easy to do databse calls with no SQL even. Everything is sort of done for you.

Have not had much time to do anything with it myself at this point though.

[jAQUAN]

whoa, now thats what I'm talking about. That image converter is my idea of the perfect web app.

[gesteves]

From what he has shown me, ruby really makes it easy to do databse calls with no SQL even. Everything is sort of done for you.

Yup, you can do some relatively complex stuff using very simple commands. For example, if you wanted to select a user by login and password, or create it if it doesn't exist, you could do this:

@user = User.find_or_create_by_login_and_password(login, password)

You can also define the database schema using migrations, written in Ruby instead of database-specific DDL, so you can migrate your schema to a different DBMS simply by changing the config file and re-running the migrations. Every migration file has a version number, and the number of the last run migration is stored in the database itself, so you can make (and undo) changes to the schema without having to reload it form scratch and losing all your data in the process. It's actually quite cool.

[drunknbass]

so these components are to make life easier? cause i think components are good if you desgn them. but like flash and using components, using someone elses is like buying a website template. but i dont see it too much diff than php.. i dont rewrite each website 100%. i usally grab things ive already written, like login scripts, galleries, etc and use them for diff sites and tailor them so they fit the site they are used on.. so its kinda the same but not.

[Sybersnake]

For what I've heard, you can write a ruby on rails app with way less lines of code than by creating the same app in php. On of the problems that it is supposed to have is scalability.

yes, its a simpler coding language which is then compiled by the framework to build the actual application in ruby.

you input ||||| much code and you get |||||||||||||||| out of it. (but there are usually tons of limitations and end result of sloppiness)

[jasonsplace]

i think components are good if you desgn them. but like flash and using components, using someone elses is like buying a website template.

How can you compare using components to buying a template. Templats are for those who don't know how to develop. Using a component is no different than when an application developer uses a Windows combo box, text box, scroll bar, checkbox or radio button in their application. It doesn't mean that the person that used it couldn't develop it (which I couldn't). It just shows that someone would rather spend 15 minutes learning how a prebuilt component works rather the spending 5 hours making their own.

[drunknbass]

thats the same difference to using a template or prebuilt code.
if you use a component all the time why not develope your own? because you cant? if you could, im sure you would.

[jasonsplace]

That isn't exactly true. I have made my own checkboxes and combo boxes before but I don't see a purpose now. I can spend a few hours making it work right or I can drag one on the stage that is already tested and works well. It is so much more effiient. With scrollpanes and scrollbars I never figured those out. Templates are somethingthat i'd never use. They are expensive and I can typically do the same thing for cheaper.