<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>smarticus-blog - Latest Comments in I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smarticus-blog.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://smarticus-blog.disqus.com/i8217m_smarter_than_rails/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 12:24:43 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-9131831</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't think I'm playing semantics. Call it what you like, but Sinatra's scope is vastly smaller than Rails'. Sinatra just does routing. Rails does routing plus views plus ORM plus a whole lot else. Personally, I find that extra stuff oppressive rather than liberating, for several reasons:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(a) personal aesthetics about design (e.g. why aren't views objects?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(b) too much invisible magic (i like convention, but what's so bad about configuration as long as it's concise?)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(c) Rails' absence of clean or consistent APIs (see my reply to graysky, and also all the many different and undocumented semantics for view helper methods)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;An analogy -- admittedly imperfect -- is Sinatra is to Rails as Servlets are to J2EE.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;With Rack and Sinatra and enough good gems, and just a little bit of glue code, anyone can write their own little framework. So... what's the point of Rails again?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alex Chaffee</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 12:24:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-9129979</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I would be to differ.  Sinatra is a web framework.  Calling it "just a library" is playing semantics.  &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bryanl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 11:26:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-9129802</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Absolutely. By far the majority of our time spent coding Erector was figuring out how to plug a new View type into the godawful mess of spaghetti that is ActionController. And then doing it again and again whenever there was a new release of Rails.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alex Chaffee</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 11:20:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-9129732</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sinatra is not a framework. It's just a library. Who needs frameworks?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;See &lt;a href="http://github.com/alexch/vegas" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://github.com/alexch/vegas"&gt;http://github.com/alexch/vegas&lt;/a&gt; for my lame lightning talk attempt at proving you can have an app with all the power of Rails without any Rails in it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alex Chaffee</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 11:18:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-8742698</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I agree in principle, but without a Rails API in practice this can be difficult.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;For example, we use the "multi_db" plugin (like masochism) to transparently load balance between a master and slave(s). AFAIK, there is no way to have a plugin to do this without reaching into the guts of Rails and change the behavior of the db connection. This is fragile, and doesn't always make upgrading easy but what's a better alternative?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Even as a plugin author it can be tricky to know what is fair game to reference. Obviously, methods that are private or protected are likely to change, but about public methods? Are those all API?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You're certainly right that there are very unnecessary ventures into "C" territory, but even when trying to stay on the golden path, it isn't always very well marked.  &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mike Champion</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:03:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-8737603</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think we both have some experience with ISTR given our time together at RHG so without going into too much detail, you hit the nail on the head with this one. It was a valuable lesson though in that I will never again venture so far off the 'rails' as we did all too often there.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:34:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-8737541</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Of course this applies to other frameworks as well.  Smart-Aleck... ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bryanl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:32:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I&amp;#8217;m Smarter Than Rails</title><link>http://smartic.us/2009/04/25/im-smarter-than-rails/#comment-8737359</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Don't forget the D) option, use sinatra, ramaze or merb. ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">atmos</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:27:41 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>