• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails


  • Subject: Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails
  • From: Miguel Arroz <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:55:36 +0000

Hi!

I vote for moving the raw snapshots one layer up, so that we can solve the concurrency issues that make my head spin! :) IMO it's the most serious problem in EOF. There are others, but this one sucks.

  Yours

Miguel Arroz

On 2008/03/14, at 15:49, Mike Schrag wrote:

I also think that without a framework like Wonder, the stock WO frameworks don't do a very good job of insulating developers from complexity. Things like Wonder's autolocking and automatic inverse relationship management remove huge conceptual complexity from the process of development. ActiveRecord, for instance, has no concept of an "editing context". There are obviously huge pros and cons to this, but it does result in a far simpler persistence framework. I think many of the features of Wonder bring WO much closer to that ideal while still allowing the richness and the benefits of the GOOD parts of an editing context. ActiveRecord doesn't have a snapshot cache like WO. Again, huge pros and cons, but cache freshness management in EOF is really complicated, especially as you start to scale your app. WO does a fantastic job at the first 90 and makes you work hard at the last 10. I think the first Rails 90 is less than WO's in many respects, but the curve is much more level all the way across. So WO does a lot for you for the common tasks, but some of the design choices they made in the frameworks to do this can make your life difficult when things get demanding.

This is what I hope Pierre and his team (along with WOLips) focus on in future major versions of WO. How can barriers be removed on the front-end so new people can get into WO more easily while at the same time removing hurdles on the back-end so that you don't have to work as hard to build a very scalable site (... without compromising what is cool about WO). All I can say is that we always look around, and we keep coming back to WO.

Miguel Arroz http://www.terminalapp.net http://www.ipragma.com



Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

References: 
 >WO vs. Ruby on Rails (From: "Andrew R. Kinnie" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails (From: David LeBer <email@hidden>)
 >Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails (From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails
  • Next by Date: Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails
  • Previous by thread: Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails
  • Next by thread: Re: WO vs. Ruby on Rails
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread