What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- brainnovate, on 11/28/2008, -0/+36Direct link to video http://media.rubyonrails.org/video/rails_blog_2.mo ...
- JohanMarcusGuy, on 11/28/2008, -15/+9Rails? RAILS?!
LOL! (Laughing out loudly).
There may be some hesitation when I tell you i've seen the future, but believe me, I've worked for Walmart's electronic department for many years, on the "code orange low prices" team. The stuff i've seen is unreal, it would rip your world apart, tear your soul up and leave the tattered remains behind so that small children could look into your soulless husk through your eyes and see all suffering wrought upon this world.
Two years ago I was like you, I was excited about "Rails" about "rubies" and all your "technology", I wish I had the time so I could laugh at myself. But I feel I should devote my remaining time to speaking the truth before they find me.
There is a very new programming language, and it's VERY real, my employers used to talk about it in hushed whispers, that is, before they mysteriously disappeared not two months ago. I'd encourage you not to read on if you value your life, in doing so you are eating the proverbial apple from satan's tree of life.
The name they use for this horrid death-machine code is "BASIC", I've seen workers in the back room deploying interactive applications that would make your blood leave your body for fear of association. Calculators can be made in just hours. Interactive tennis physics simulators in mere days.
I can sense your fear through these tubes I'm on, but I want you to know there is something you can do. I need your support in disabling the internet and e-lectronics industry to prevent this code from becoming sentient and killing us all.
This may be your greatest moment, or the beginning of the end. That's for you to decide.
If you're ready to stop this virtual disease, reply to this "e-thread". I'll then contact you, but please realize the chance of survival is less than 4%.
-Johan Marcus Guy- ryleyleckie, on 11/28/2008, -1/+6you are nuts.
- DeceasedVirus, on 11/28/2008, -3/+3Gay
- mrsteveman1, on 11/28/2008, -1/+9Funny how we speak the same language and yet, not really.
- Darkaged, on 11/29/2008, -0/+6Holy *****, you're back
- steviesteveo, on 11/30/2008, -0/+3That is the weirdest comment I've ever seen.
And I go on YouTube.
- stockjones, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3Rails is a bit overhyped but Basic lol. I think the rumour was True about Walmart running on AS400 using RPG.
- JohanMarcusGuy, on 11/28/2008, -15/+9Rails? RAILS?!
- MtheoryX, on 11/28/2008, -6/+3415 minutes to make a simple blog...3 hours to figure out how to deploy it to your webhost ;P
Also, TextMate FTW!- brainnovate, on 11/28/2008, -1/+22I have one word: Passenger.
- MtheoryX, on 11/28/2008, -0/+8Holy crap, nice!
- jatoskep, on 11/28/2008, -1/+7Textmate is amazing.
Hopefully this video is better than the last one. Somehow that 15 minutes took a few more hours than expected. :P- lvizon, on 11/29/2008, -0/+6"But look at all the things I'm not doing.."
"Whoops!"
peace to DHH
- lvizon, on 11/29/2008, -0/+6"But look at all the things I'm not doing.."
- heyjohngreen, on 11/28/2008, -0/+14Dude those days are over...
Check out Phusion Passenger: http://www.modrails.com/
We recently switched over to it for our social education site, http://learnhub.com/, and its fantastic. No more monit restarting mongrels every few hours. - stockjones, on 11/29/2008, -3/+4You failed me at .mov links
- Fubarepublic, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2ogg FTW
But flv is good to go...
- Fubarepublic, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2ogg FTW
- brainnovate, on 11/28/2008, -1/+22I have one word: Passenger.
- dball48, on 11/28/2008, -10/+13Please don't.
- MrViklund, on 11/28/2008, -10/+4weblog or webblog?
- Nicoon, on 11/28/2008, -1/+6Don't be silly. There's no such thing as a "webblog". The correct word is weblog that later got abbreviated to "blog".
- MrViklund, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2Why?
- Nicoon, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2What do you mean, why? It's a log on the web, hence 'weblog'.
- stoprock, on 11/28/2008, -0/+6web log -> weblog -> blog
- MrViklund, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2we-blog
- saucercrab, on 11/28/2008, -1/+2weblog is about as outdated as www.
- DeceasedVirus, on 11/28/2008, -0/+2four ninety nine
- Nicoon, on 11/28/2008, -1/+6Don't be silly. There's no such thing as a "webblog". The correct word is weblog that later got abbreviated to "blog".
- fatas, on 11/28/2008, -16/+615 minutes...huh... a bit like a 2-hour movie that takes 2 hours to make.....
dugg down for the use of .mov file- jackspayed, on 11/28/2008, -1/+2you need more internets
- wbuffet, on 11/28/2008, -4/+1oooo don't knock quicktime or the little girlies will mod you down! Mwahahaha. Mod me down little quicktime girly boys. Oh wait, whats that? The 2 biggest video sites on the net don't use quicktime? Oh wait, whats that? Flash? Does the iPhone support it? No? Wonder why. Steve Jobs gets his little girl panties in a knot.
- alihahd, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2So, just to summarize, you've got nothing negative to say about Quicktime except that "little girlies" use it and that a couple of "dude kicked in the junk" sites don't support it? I'm just trying to understand the point of your post.
- wbuffet, on 11/29/2008, -0/+1There was no point. It was an attempt at a humor-laced troll mixed with some actual fact and wrapped up in a tidy digg package that ended up slagging Apple. Move along.
- MtheoryX, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2Mod you down?
GTFO!
- alihahd, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2So, just to summarize, you've got nothing negative to say about Quicktime except that "little girlies" use it and that a couple of "dude kicked in the junk" sites don't support it? I'm just trying to understand the point of your post.
- tippmann1, on 11/28/2008, -3/+13Excellent webcast. So much better then the original one. My only beef with it is he doesn't explain some of the code that he adds in. But that would have made the webcast 17 minutes and not 15...
- ruddy, on 11/28/2008, -1/+0
- steviesteveo, on 11/30/2008, -0/+1If you use wordpress.com, I hope you can make a blog in 15 minutes.
- ruddy, on 11/28/2008, -1/+0
- mozert, on 11/28/2008, -4/+10too much sensationalist
- rsHoratio, on 11/28/2008, -22/+16Ruby on Rails? are you ***** me? ***** lets digg up that video on making a website with Frontpage then.
- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Ruby on Rails is a full stack framework that powers big production sites. Frontpage is a web design toolkit for small, mostly static sites.
How can you even begin to compare the two?
- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Ruby on Rails is a full stack framework that powers big production sites. Frontpage is a web design toolkit for small, mostly static sites.
- LanceUppercut, on 11/28/2008, -7/+11A heavily abstracted framework *golf clap*
- RobotBuddha, on 11/28/2008, -8/+3Wait, so this is a video of code? The site's down so I can't tell. But showing coding through a, usually pixilated, video is one of my pet peeves. That's like putting a webpage together, recording a video of the screen with a camera, and putting that up instead of the actual webpage.
- jsauter, on 11/28/2008, -3/+3I think the point of the video is more of a demonstration on how rapidly you can create a CRUD functionality web application with the RoR framework. However, judging by the scalability that rubyonrails.com is also demonstrating at this very moment due to the digg effect, would you really WANT to write a blog that more than 10 people will access with RoR?
- brainnovate, on 11/28/2008, -0/+4Its kind of embarassing that it crashed their server, but I have sites on Rails that have stood up to a 75,000 unique in 12 hours FP Effect, and that was on a small VPS. And it didn't even register on TOP when it happened.
- stoprock, on 11/28/2008, -0/+4What crashed the server is that they are hosting the video directly rather than through a CDN. It has nothing to do with Rails.
- brainnovate, on 11/28/2008, -0/+5@ruddy I was using nginx and could have gotten 50x that. And it would have taken me 50x longer to write the app in PHP, so no thanks.
@stoprock agreed. Page caching would help if they are not using it already, but I am guessing its apache or Nginx that can't keep up with the requests. Edit: it looks like the proxy may be to blame.
- punkrockscks, on 11/28/2008, -0/+5ya you should have prolly watched it before commenting.
- jsauter, on 11/28/2008, -3/+3I think the point of the video is more of a demonstration on how rapidly you can create a CRUD functionality web application with the RoR framework. However, judging by the scalability that rubyonrails.com is also demonstrating at this very moment due to the digg effect, would you really WANT to write a blog that more than 10 people will access with RoR?
- Raptor007, on 11/28/2008, -1/+17Great, because that's what we need... less effort required to start writing about nothing. :¬)
- duckyinc, on 11/28/2008, -6/+59Create a blog in 4 minutes with wordpress.com
- Jeffler, on 11/28/2008, -4/+5Or Fantastico -> Wordpress in 2 minutes if you want to host it yourself
- positron, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2Fantastico sucks
- steviesteveo, on 11/30/2008, -0/+2No it doesn't, it's a very useful service for new website owners. While many new website owners don't have anything interesting to say on their blog there's a chance that someone who doesn't know rampant FTP settings tweaking but does know their stuff about say, the law or medicine and I'd like to hear from them.
- Loudernet, on 11/29/2008, -2/+2create a blog in 15 seconds with wordpress mu installed on your site
- r3negadeX, on 11/29/2008, -5/+7ewww, PHP.
- Jeffler, on 11/28/2008, -4/+5Or Fantastico -> Wordpress in 2 minutes if you want to host it yourself
- atrus123, on 11/28/2008, -9/+34Site is down. What does this suggest about Rails?
- wush, on 11/28/2008, -0/+2that the logo looks like a tentacle?
- derf956, on 11/28/2008, -1/+3I think I'm going to create more accounts just to digg you up again.
- mikusd, on 11/28/2008, -2/+5my thoughts exactly. can someone explain why i should use RoR instead of my preferred language (PHP) and favorite framework? (http://FUSEphp.net)
i'm not convinced Rails (or ruby for that matter) is worth my time- Ratty, on 11/28/2008, -0/+2Street cred.
- Nicoon, on 11/28/2008, -0/+6There isn't a reason to why you should use RoR over your preferred language.
What's important isn't the language, but the architecture. - puttly, on 11/28/2008, -1/+3The language means nothing, its how its implemented. PHP and django/python are both solid architectures, you should use what you prefer using and know how to use.
- bradleyland, on 11/29/2008, -1/+7Well, considering that you're already using an MVC framework, you should only switch if you're interested in Ruby over PHP. Personally, after a few years working with PHP, I picked up Ruby and never looked back. There are several aspects of Ruby that are not present or cannot be easily duplicated in PHP:
* Blocks
* Everything (yes, everything) is an object, which allows syntax like
1.hours.from_now
returns a date object set to one hour from the current time
10.minutes.ago
returns a date object set to ten minutes before the current time
5.times { this_is_done_5_times... }
executes the code within the braces five times
"hello".capitalize
returns "Hello"
"stressed".reverse
returns "desserts"
* Method indicators and class variable declarations make variable scope and method purpose more clear
@@class_var
@instance_var
object.method! < - - destructive method (changes the object)
object.method? < - - returns a boolean
Some of these might seem important to you, others may not. You may never build a project in Ruby on Rails, but don't let some mob mentality prevent you from learning a great new language like Ruby. - bradleyland, on 11/30/2008, -0/+2Mikusd, I just thought of a couple more reasons you should consider checking out RoR. What are you using for deployment and versioning management? I only ask because I know quite a few "good" PHP programers who's idea of deployment is a server-side shell script that performs a `svn sw` to the latest stable tag and `ln -s` some resource directories. And that's an advanced example. Many don't use a source code repository, and very few have a well thought out deployment plan that can handle tasks like backup and rollback. Not saying this is you, but if you do have a good deployment plan, you'll appreciate what I'm about to suggest all that much more.
What I'm getting at is called Capistrano, and it's not limited to Ruby on Rails -- you could use it to deploy your PHP applications, but you do have to write cap scripts in Ruby. Deployment tasks aren't part of an actual application, but the Ruby on Rails community treats deployment as an integral part of development. Capistrano can be used to call Rake tasks on the server side, which means you can run migrations, perform backups, or just about anything else you can think of by calling a cap command.
Ruby on Rails development extends beyond the basics and in to an end-to-end environment. What you give up is some flexibility (in terms of how you implement), but what you gain are a lot of really powerful tools. A lot of programmers refuse to follow convention because they believe that they know a better way. IMO, this attitude is often driven either hubris or ignorance. If you have really good ideas about how to extend Rails or Capistrano, both are FOSS projects, so you can create your own fork, or you can create a derivative framework. That is the approach the Merb team took. They wanted the power of MVC, but without the constraints of the Rails framework, so they created something similar. That's another you should probably check out if you're interested in Ruby.
- stoprock, on 11/28/2008, -2/+16It doesn't say anything about Rails. It just shows that whoever runs the site should be using a CDN to host the video, regardless of what the site is built with.
- kris33, on 11/28/2008, -0/+2Mirror:
http://gamedetails.net/diverse/video/rails_blog_2. ... - r3negadeX, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2Hmm, reminds me of
http://railscantscale.com
- j3ff86, on 11/28/2008, -0/+515 minutes to create it and an eternity to spam it as a signature in Digg comments.
- fuckingusername, on 11/28/2008, -2/+7create a weblog in 15 minutes
kill the host in 5 minutes
priceless! - derf956, on 11/28/2008, -11/+8223 diggs and the Ruby on Rails site is down.
Maybe having to spend a few hours building a blog is better than having to suffer constant downtime from an inefficient framework?- kris33, on 11/28/2008, -0/+2Mirror:
http://gamedetails.net/diverse/video/rails_blog_2. ... - dogparade, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2Doesn't the site actually use PHP
- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2What an idiotic comment. Half of the sites submitted to digg go down and it usually has nothing to do with the framework.
Rails is not a particularly inefficient framework, but suffers the problems as any other framework when you don't do proper capacity planning. You can't expect one server to power a thousand requests coming in at the same time regardless of what framework you're using.
- kris33, on 11/28/2008, -0/+2Mirror:
- golevel, on 11/28/2008, -10/+17Digg + php + server > Ruby blog + ruby on rails + server
Mirror please. - Anzat, on 11/28/2008, -4/+4I like Rails, but these "do blah blah blah in 5 minutes" tutorials are stupid.
- golevel, on 11/28/2008, -2/+2Does anyone know of any good articles that explains why exactly someone would use rails over anything else? (that is, factors other than time)
- punkrockscks, on 11/28/2008, -1/+4For me it's Ruby. Going back to Java or Php is pretty hard after Ruby.
- dankreek, on 11/29/2008, -0/+6Time is the most expensive element in software development...
- craigtmackenzie, on 11/29/2008, -1/+4agreed, it's ruby. rails / merb / camping. whatever you use, it's ruby that makes it great.
- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2I'm so sick of PHP fanboys coming on forums with their "PHP ruleezzz" comments.
Why don't you go pick up a copy of Agile Development with Rails and try using Rails. I used to be a PHP programmer and after reading this book, I switched to Rails within a month. I've now been on Rails for 2+ years and am never planning on returning to PHP.
I don't see how people in the PHP community still can't understand Rails' unique benefits even after PHP has tried to copy so many Rails features (look at CakePHP, Symfony, PHP on Trax ... all influenced by Rails).
- limezor2, on 11/28/2008, -4/+5Great, I have no clue what he was doing. I can make a WordPress blog on my own server in 5 minutes + the time it takes to upload the files. Basically he is just very familiar with Rails and can do his fancy magical copy and paste and pretend it took 15 minutes.
- RobotBuddha, on 11/28/2008, -1/+2To be fair, it does seem to come with a custom api system. Haven't watched it so that might be just a barebones 'get variable, churn out variable'. But if it's actually well implemented that could be a plus. Though, really, the whole points the ease of development with ruby/rails rather than the nature of what's actually finished as a final product.
- puttly, on 11/28/2008, -2/+51 you are not writing wordpress, your simply installing it to a webserver.
2 rails comes with a scaffold system, what it does is it automatically creates an input, edit and destroy page for every database table
even if i was to write the actual code for this rails blog I could do it under 15 mins, as i'm sure he could but he was presenting it very slowly- Otto, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2I've never understood the point of the scaffolding approach. Why in the heck would you have database tables map directly to operations? That doesn't make any sense for a real-world application. Your database would be designed very poorly and your operations would be planned out badly. It just seems like a design nightmare.
- Otto, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2I've never understood the point of the scaffolding approach. Why in the heck would you have database tables map directly to operations? That doesn't make any sense for a real-world application. Your database would be designed very poorly and your operations would be planned out badly. It just seems like a design nightmare.
- Jaymoon, on 11/29/2008, -3/+3"1 you are not writing wordpress, your simply installing it to a webserver."
The objective is to create a blog. Whether that means writing it from scratch, or uploading some files to a server, the goal is still the same.
That's great and all this guy can make a blog from scratch, but why re-invent the wheel if you don't absolutely need to. - craigtmackenzie, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3@jaymoorn, you're missing the point, the end-goal is no "have a blog" it's "create a blog", as in write the software to power a simple blog.
- Teksaid, on 11/28/2008, -2/+4That would be cool if the server would load...
- tgc1, on 11/28/2008, -3/+5Yeah, I could build all that too if I was using code that I pre-made just for a demonstration. Try building it from scratch in Rails without the templates. Me thinks you'll be there a lot longer than 15 minutes. The entirety of the presentation relies on the fact that the code is pre-made and the templates are pre-made. Personally, i'd rather just do it all from scratch. It's more flexible and customizable. That and I don't have to learn that obfuscated language. Sure, it'll take me a few hours. But at the end of it i've got something a lot better than what was presented.
- puttly, on 11/28/2008, -0/+5scaffolds are bad.
- MtheoryX, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2Ruby is an obfuscated language?
News to me.
- pubb, on 11/28/2008, -5/+15http://canrailsscale.com/
- phpld, on 11/28/2008, -7/+7ruby on fails
- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Another jealous PHP fanboy.
- MattBD, on 11/28/2008, -0/+4How does Django compare to Ruby on Rails? I'm learning Python at the moment and I'm interested in maybe learning Django.
- Ratty, on 11/28/2008, -2/+7Django is awesome.
- RobotBuddha, on 11/28/2008, -0/+6I don't have much experience with ruby on rails, but django is beautiful. It's a really nice extension of the basic python way of doing things. It's a little odd in places, the database stuff in particular took me a while to get used to. But it's easily my favorite web framework.
- pubb, on 11/28/2008, -0/+3definitely worth checking out. there's a tutorial on the django site for getting started as well as an entire book online if you want to get more in depth.
the one thing that i like a little more about rails is that rails is more accepting of changes to the database (migrations) - if i remember correctly django does everything the first time but updates to the schema are handled manually. - SiSePuede, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2Same here bro. Want to hang out?
- MtheoryX, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2bromance.
- MWeather, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3Django is a work of art, so long as your needs fall into the Django way of doing things, which 90% of the time, they do.
You can do a Django blog in 15 minutes, easy. Automated admin, comments app, users app, and generic views.
- kaltoft, on 11/28/2008, -0/+1Mirror: http://www.ebz.dk/martin/mirror/new-15-minute-blog ...
- palatka, on 11/28/2008, -1/+19I just want to say how awesome Ryan Bates (from RailsCasts.com) is. He's a pillar in the rails community.
- WiretapStudios, on 11/29/2008, -3/+2I got a pillar in the rails once, it hurt like hell.
- 4sak3n0ne, on 11/28/2008, -6/+8To those of you mentioning Wordpress in 4 minutes... Go kill yourself; society will thank you later. Comparing a fully-functional pre-built piece of software to something a guy is making on the fly is ludicrous.
- Beatmiser, on 11/28/2008, -1/+4If you think that tutorial was 'on the fly' you are sorely mistaken. That was all prebuilt, copy and pasted in.
- diggdiggerid, on 11/29/2008, -1/+3a fully-functional pre-built piece of software......like ruby on rails.....??
making on the fly....surely you mean notepad/putty! - mcrbids, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2There ain't no "on the fly" here, folks. Nothing more than including the "modules" that are pre-built.
RoR has always struck me as a fast, quick way to write crappy, poor-performance software. I've known a few blogs written in RoR, and as soon as they are mildly successful, they become hard to read for a while, followed by a "we've upgraded our softwarez!" post and sudden improvements in uptime.
- sanchinka, on 11/28/2008, -0/+20Dugg for memories of digg's early front-page stories.
- jahman, on 11/28/2008, -8/+2i can create a wordpress weblog in 5 (famous) minutes!!! thats 3X faster!
oh wait... - SoundJudgment, on 11/28/2008, -9/+2Buried for having a video with an .MOV extension.
- bigtrouble777, on 11/28/2008, -3/+11These comments about rails not scaling are extremely ignorant. Rails is used at wsj.com and the nytimes to a greater extent. You need to use the tools at your disposal properly... You wouldn't use a hammer to loosen a bolt. Rails is great, but it may not be great for every level of you application stack.
If you know how to cache your pages properly and scale your hardware properly then rails can be an extremely useful framework. If you write good capistrano scripts you can make deployment a breeze. If your app is in an SOA environment, active resource is a godsend.
I'm guessing most people here have never tried to deploy rails in an enterprise environment. It can work, you just need to know what you are doing. Creating a blog in 15min doesn't make you an expert.
Try digging into the wordpress code and make some architectural changes. Wordpress is great if you are hands off of the code. It's not so great if you have editors that want features added on a whim.- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Thank you. People make such ignorant comments without even investigating.
I hear the stupid comments about Twitter not scaling all the time. It's about time to set the record straight: Twitter did not have scaling problems due to Rails. How do I know? Well, for one thing, the guys at Powerset personally asked the Twitter dev lead about this and they had the record set straight (by the way, I happen to personally work with the guys at Powerset at times).
Anyway, you can see what I'm about by reading point #3 on this blog entry: http://glu.ttono.us/articles/2007/06/21/powerset-t ...
- aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Thank you. People make such ignorant comments without even investigating.
- Kragnerac, on 11/28/2008, -7/+8Django.
- hsbsitez, on 11/28/2008, -2/+2http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/10 ...
- punkrockscks, on 11/28/2008, -1/+10So, say what you will about it, but Rails changed web development for the better and continues to do so - Django, CakePHP, etc.. owe Rails a lot. I don't think it's 'better' than other frameworks out there, but for me, I've become much more productive, and happier as a programmer.
I'm not sure why there is so much hate for Rails on here.- stockjones, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2Probably because people use what they know. PHP has been around for a long time. It works just fine. Rails is ok but its yet just another new language in the mix that still has some little flaws. It can be slow and no one is sure how well it scales etc. I know about Twitter using it. I also know about the many Twitter outages.
- MWeather, on 11/29/2008, -0/+6Rails isn't a language. Ruby is, and it came out the same year PHP did.
- MtheoryX, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2The bottleneck is never the language/framework...it's the network and the architecture of your app.
If you put a ***** app on a shared host, it doesn't matter of it's PHP or Ruby or Python, it's still a ***** app on a shared host that will fail. - MWeather, on 11/30/2008, -0/+2With the right caching, even a shared host can survive being dugg.
- stockjones, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2Probably because people use what they know. PHP has been around for a long time. It works just fine. Rails is ok but its yet just another new language in the mix that still has some little flaws. It can be slow and no one is sure how well it scales etc. I know about Twitter using it. I also know about the many Twitter outages.
- addiktion, on 11/28/2008, -0/+16Ruby is a beautiful language. Even if you don't like the recipe of Ruby on Rails I don't see how you can possibly go back to PHP after you've used Ruby. It's not perfect yet but then again RoR only been around for 2 or 3 years. They just pushed out safe threads in rails 2.2, as well as etags and of course page caching. Some of the changes do improve performance quite a bit.
What some people don't understand is just because Ruby on Rails is slower then the competition right now doesn't mean it can't be optimized to run on par with the rest of them in the near future. This video is intended to show you just how quick you can get something up and running. It's like this with most things you add to your web application in RoR. Takes minimal code if you follow the Ruby on Rails conventions. It's not for everyone but if your building web pages for medium to small web sites I'd say it's more then adequate.
Twitter uses RoR and they obviously get a lot of traffic. You just need to know how to scale your application properly. If you take a look at some of the RubyConf 08 videos you'll find a few talks about scaling rails and breaking it down to smaller applications to achieve different functions on different servers. I just wish Phusion Passenger would add a windows version already! :/- codebanshee, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2I agree entirely with your comments, and yes, Twitter has always been put forward as an example of just what Rails is capable of if handled properly, but even they still have problems that cause the site to be unavailable for periods of time.
- pubb, on 11/29/2008, -0/+4Twitter is a great app but I have to disagree with the perception that Twitter is seen as something positive for Rails. Twitter's inability to scale (until recently) damaged Rails reputation IMO. There were also rumors that Twitter was going to ditch RoR altogether.
People do need to take a step back though - with Rails you are gaining a lot up front in developer productivity. Are you building the next Twitter? Will you even run into the scaling issues? I've built a couple sites with Rails and development was a lot of fun. And my sites stay up. - addiktion, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3Yeah and that's why you have ports of Merb and others to pick up the competition. In the end I think rails could turn into a solid solution. I do agree Twitter isn't perfect and has had more reliability issues due to rails but it's managed to still stay popular and hold the limelight on it's niche/market while ironing out those weaknesses. Most sites though in my opinion won't carry the kind of traffic that twitter/myspace/facebook would see. In which case I'm hoping those rail developers get their ass in gear and get us a high performance rails setup.
- pubb, on 11/29/2008, -0/+4Twitter is a great app but I have to disagree with the perception that Twitter is seen as something positive for Rails. Twitter's inability to scale (until recently) damaged Rails reputation IMO. There were also rumors that Twitter was going to ditch RoR altogether.
- monzee, on 11/29/2008, -1/+3I remember reading an interview of one of the developers of Twitter and he said that the Rails features are really punishing performance-wise and they had to remove them to make their site scale. So Twitter is probably more of a pure Ruby app than a RoR one.
- koreth, on 11/29/2008, -0/+5"Even if you don't like the recipe of Ruby on Rails I don't see how you can possibly go back to PHP after you've used Ruby."
Man, someone really needs to invent a third computer language. It sucks only having those two to choose from. - tobor0, on 11/29/2008, -6/+3Ruby is prettier and easier to read than PHP? Really, tell me about this code:
def func(list)
for i in list
yield i
end
func (['cat','dog','horse']) do |animal|
puts animal
end
Compare with PHP:
foreach(array('cat', 'dog', 'horse') as $animal) {
echo $animal(); // or call_user_func($animal);
}
You'll find this sort of do-it-the-hard-way-because-some-acronym-says-to-do-it-that-way inanity all over that stupid language. Basically, every metaprogramming feature that exists in Ruby is a lot better in Python anyway so if I needed those features -- which I wouldn't when developing a web app -- I would use a mature language with a real virtual machine instead of a broke down language which just recently became thread safe.- pubb, on 11/29/2008, -2/+11['cat', 'dog', 'horse'].each { |a| puts a }
- tobor0, on 11/29/2008, -4/+2Sorry, spacing wasn't preserved by digg comment system.
- tobor0, on 11/29/2008, -5/+5Pubb, thanks for the quicker way.
Still, how does that make any more sense? You can practically read the PHP code as English.
Looking at Ruby, if I didn't know the language but had a C background I would immediately wonder:
What is "|a|"?
Is each a method, and if so why aren't there parentheses around the arguments?
Are those curly braces the same as parentheses or do they delimit blocks of code? If they are blocks of code then does "|a| puts a" standalone as code by itself?
My bigger question is why does the language depart so much and seemingly so unnecessarily from how other languages do things? It's like they changed things for the sake of changing things. - VulgusPecum, on 11/29/2008, -1/+6It's called a lambda and I (along with lots of other people) think that it's pretty easy to understand.
- addiktion, on 11/29/2008, -1/+4Well tobor0 what I like about Ruby in general is the minimal syntax usage and minimal code you have to write to achieve the same effect. Sure you have to understand the language somewhat but you have to understand the language with all programming code and reading Ruby is like reading the same book that has 100 pages less of writing and you still get the same shine with less repeated syntax.
I'm no professional but I've read PHP books that gave me a headache with all the massive syntax I had to deal with and god forbid you forget a ;()[], etc. I find a @blogs = Blog.find[:all] a hell of a lot easier then what you would have to write in PHP to achieve the equivalent. The MVC model, DRY, and standard RoR conventions has set me up to think and code like a better programmer. Granted I would probably stick with PHP if it looked anything like Ruby does due to how optimized PHP is but if you want the MVC I guess you can always go with CakePHP to achieve the same structure. - Taiyoryu, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3['cat', 'dog', 'horse'].each { |a| puts a }
one way to read it in English:
Given an array of animals, for each animal a, print the name of animal a.
@tobor0
Given your code example, it's obvious you don't know enough about Ruby. You're trying to write Ruby code as if it were some other language, which is certainly doable, but unless you read a book on Ruby and understand the "Ruby way", you're just not going to get it. And in fact, when I tell people who want to learn Rails, I advise them to learn Ruby first, because much of Rails is built the "Ruby way". - xarorax, on 11/29/2008, -0/+4puts ['cat', 'dog', 'horse']
tobor0: I believe you should submit your code snippet and explanation to thedailywtf, where more people can appreciate it. - tobor0, on 11/30/2008, -0/+2Umm, I looked at your code again and you guys are just plain retarded.
The code is supposed to call a function named 'cat', 'dog' and 'horse'. Your code just prints out 3 words. That's not the same thing at all. - addiktion, on 11/30/2008, -0/+2you can just as easily throw in a function call inside that block I believe.
['cat', 'dog', 'horse'].each { |animal| puts animal } // or call_pet(animal) - aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2@tabor:
As addiktion pointed out, you can do anything you want inside that each block whether it is printing out the string or call a function with that name.
And, by the way, you can also do for loops in Ruby; it's just that no one uses them because the code is not as clean looking. This code syntax in Ruby is highly influenced by functional programming languages such as Lisp (and the general concepts behind lambda).
You may think the "for" loop makes more sense because it's all you've done your whole life, but the Ruby way makes sense and opens up new worlds. Once you start bringing in anonymous functions, you can do all kinds of neat things that you may not have thought of before. As pointed out by Joel http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/08/01.htm ... , you could even argue that Google's concept of map-reduce (one of their most important algorithms) came out of this style of programming. It's a shame that amateur programmers don't understand functional programming.
Let me close by mentioning that I used to be a professional PHP programmer until I switched to Rails. So I, for one, can make a direct comparison based on years of experience in both languages.
- pubb, on 11/29/2008, -2/+11['cat', 'dog', 'horse'].each { |a| puts a }
- codebanshee, on 11/29/2008, -1/+2I agree entirely with your comments, and yes, Twitter has always been put forward as an example of just what Rails is capable of if handled properly, but even they still have problems that cause the site to be unavailable for periods of time.
- stockjones, on 11/29/2008, -9/+4php > rails. Sorry rails is cool in a way but a bit overhyped and in some ways restrictive. And why is less code slower? Digg on CakePHP which is kind of rails like model but on PHP.
- monzee, on 11/29/2008, -3/+2Digg on CakePHP? I highly doubt that. Cake is one of the least performant PHP frameworks.
- r3negadeX, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3PHP is a language; Rails is a framework. Maybe you should take Programming Languages 101 before you make silly comments like this, it helps.
Also, PHP sucks dick.
- diggdisc, on 11/29/2008, -10/+1lol comical. Ruby is a joke.
- GrantMVP, on 11/29/2008, -6/+3Ummm this comment is for the Ruby people. You need to step up your marketing on the east coast big time. I am from Pittsburgh and no one even knows what Ruby on Rails is out here. No one knows Ruby or PHP here. They only know Java and .NET. One second I have to throw up. And I just threw up thinking about Java. Okay thanks.
- maz2331, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3Learn C.
- bambala, on 11/29/2008, -1/+3Good developers know
- MtheoryX, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2I've done apps in PHP (using CodeIgniter as the MVC framework), RoR, Java, and .NET.
Right tool for the right job, I say. - aamer, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Looks like you've been spending too much time working in the "enterprise community." The enterprise folks only know two things: Java and .NET.
- maz2331, on 11/29/2008, -0/+3Learn C.
- fivo7, on 11/29/2008, -1/+4my attention span is to short for this
- tobor0, on 11/29/2008, -5/+2These make X in 15 minutes videos are inane and they don't demonstrate anything useful about your framework.
What would be really impressive would be if they sat someone down and they didn't know what they were going to program. Then someone drew a project out of a hat and they had to make that in 15 minutes. Then people start asking for different features and we see how fast it takes to get those done.
Recording yourself blowing through a known set of tasks for a project you've already planned and designed is not impressive, regardless of the framework.
Also, symfony FTW.- Taiyoryu, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2see Rails Day (24 hour time limit)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rails_Day
or Rails Rumble (48 hour time limit)
http://railsrumble.com/
- Taiyoryu, on 11/29/2008, -0/+2see Rails Day (24 hour time limit)
- kuturak, on 11/29/2008, -6/+1***** RoR!
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is 