4 ms·
Couple of issues I have with this article 1 - This decisions seems based more on the fact that Rails isn't as trendy as it used to be 2 - Some of these benchm
by shruubi 11y ago
Couple of issues I have with this article
1 - This decisions seems based more on the fact that Rails isn't as trendy as it used to be
2 - Some of these benchmarks for performance are pitting interpreted languages against compiled languages which will explain some of the performance difference
3 - Saying that Rails is static makes me think that the author would prefer a NodeJS like situation where every release might contain backwards-incompatible changes
4 - You don't future proof your application by trying to predict what will be popular in the future, you future proof by investing in stable technology and ensuring you have the talent pool to maintain it
- mattdeboard 11y agoYou were way more articulate in your response than I was. These really popular frameworks are "mostly static" because they have been out for years, battle-tested in production and improved for years.
- Aeolun 11y agoPHP is not so static, has remained backwards compatible for many years, and people still bitch about it every chance they get. It's just something developers do. I guess every profession has their own version of this (someone flipping burgers probably has their special way of cooking it just so on every side). In the end, regardless of the way you do it, it gets the job done.