6 ms·

In what way? What is your metric? Laravel is slower, has less support in the community and uses PHP.. It also lacks webpack and SPA capabilities which are alrea

In what way? What is your metric? Laravel is slower, has less support in the community and uses PHP.. It also lacks webpack and SPA capabilities which are already baked into Rails. So in my opinion Laravel is actually behind.

wolco 8y ago
Laravel comes with Laravel Elixir and it uses webpack2 since version 5.5. Both frameworks have huge communities. The laravel community has seen a huge growth lately. I'm not sure it's an advantage anymore. In fact the popularity has grown in favour of laravel. https://www.netguru.co/hs-fs/hubfs/image1-4.png?t=1535725104549&width=1999&name=image1-4.png https://www.netguru.co/hs-fs/hubfs/image1-4.png?t=1535725104... Comparing php to ruby php is clearly faster https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/faster/php-yarv.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... I get the feeling that laravel has surpassed rails.
- websitescenes 8y ago
  That’s cool, didn’t realize that webpacker was built in. How does Laravel handle SPA functionality? Is there a Turbolinks equivalent as well?
  - websitescenes 8y ago
    Just did some quick Googling and looks like there is a Laravel port of Turbolinks. It certainly does look like they’re catching up. Surpassed? Not convinced.
    - joelbluminator 8y ago
      "catching up" = copying most of what Rails is doing, not innovating or having any original ideas of their own. That's not really a sign of a strong community, and people working in Laravel might start asking themselves why not work with the real thing instead of a clone.
aphextron 8y ago
You want Webpack bundled with your backend framework? ...Why?
- wgerard 8y ago
  AFAIK anyway, Webpack isn't automatically installed with every Rails app but is easily available via https://github.com/rails/webpacker https://github.com/rails/webpacker. So it's not "bundled" necessarily all the time, but is quite trivially added to a Rails project. If your question is more like "why the hell would you ever want to run Webpack and Rails simultaneously together": You will increasingly find tools you want to use that more-or-less require Webpack (or a similar JS build tool). Because of things like e.g. the asset pipeline, it's extremely frustrating trying to get those tools to work in concert with each other as micro-services that know nothing about each other. It's much easier to use something like Webpacker so they can play nicely with each other.
- kossae 8y ago
  I assume Rails in this case would be used in the “full stack” sense with an asset pipeline for frontends as well, instead of the Rails API-only mode.
  - websitescenes 8y ago
    Rails can be used without the asset pipeline and with Webpacker only. But yes, most likely you will not use API-only mode of using the asset pipeline or webpacker.
  - aphextron 8y ago
    I get the idea, it just seems like a very "2013" way of doing web development. Things have moved on past the monolith for an endless amount of reasons.
    - tekstar 8y ago
      endless amount of reasons, such as?
    - 8y ago
deltron3030 8y ago
The Laravel community and projects/products that are part of it are very attractive from a small business POV, everything seems to work well together, knowledge is transferable. You have Laravel for web apps, the Statamic CMS for blogs and content heavy sites, Jigsaw for landing pages, Maizzle as email framework, all using tech and conventions that Laravel devs know. On the frontend they promote Vue and Tailwind CSS across the board. They actually make it possible for smaller shops or freelancers to have everything under their control. It's basically like a polished Wordpress ecosystem.

wolco 8y ago

Laravel comes with Laravel Elixir and it uses webpack2 since version 5.5. Both frameworks have huge communities. The laravel community has seen a huge growth lately. I'm not sure it's an advantage anymore. In fact the popularity has grown in favour of laravel. https://www.netguru.co/hs-fs/hubfs/image1-4.png?t=1535725104549&width=1999&name=image1-4.png https://www.netguru.co/hs-fs/hubfs/image1-4.png?t=1535725104... Comparing php to ruby php is clearly faster https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/faster/php-yarv.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... I get the feeling that laravel has surpassed rails.

websitescenes 8y ago
That’s cool, didn’t realize that webpacker was built in. How does Laravel handle SPA functionality? Is there a Turbolinks equivalent as well?
- websitescenes 8y ago
  Just did some quick Googling and looks like there is a Laravel port of Turbolinks. It certainly does look like they’re catching up. Surpassed? Not convinced.
  - joelbluminator 8y ago
    "catching up" = copying most of what Rails is doing, not innovating or having any original ideas of their own. That's not really a sign of a strong community, and people working in Laravel might start asking themselves why not work with the real thing instead of a clone.

aphextron 8y ago

You want Webpack bundled with your backend framework? ...Why?

wgerard 8y ago
AFAIK anyway, Webpack isn't automatically installed with every Rails app but is easily available via https://github.com/rails/webpacker https://github.com/rails/webpacker. So it's not "bundled" necessarily all the time, but is quite trivially added to a Rails project. If your question is more like "why the hell would you ever want to run Webpack and Rails simultaneously together": You will increasingly find tools you want to use that more-or-less require Webpack (or a similar JS build tool). Because of things like e.g. the asset pipeline, it's extremely frustrating trying to get those tools to work in concert with each other as micro-services that know nothing about each other. It's much easier to use something like Webpacker so they can play nicely with each other.
kossae 8y ago
I assume Rails in this case would be used in the “full stack” sense with an asset pipeline for frontends as well, instead of the Rails API-only mode.
- websitescenes 8y ago
  Rails can be used without the asset pipeline and with Webpacker only. But yes, most likely you will not use API-only mode of using the asset pipeline or webpacker.
- aphextron 8y ago
  I get the idea, it just seems like a very "2013" way of doing web development. Things have moved on past the monolith for an endless amount of reasons.
  - tekstar 8y ago
    endless amount of reasons, such as?
  - 8y ago

deltron3030 8y ago

The Laravel community and projects/products that are part of it are very attractive from a small business POV, everything seems to work well together, knowledge is transferable. You have Laravel for web apps, the Statamic CMS for blogs and content heavy sites, Jigsaw for landing pages, Maizzle as email framework, all using tech and conventions that Laravel devs know. On the frontend they promote Vue and Tailwind CSS across the board. They actually make it possible for smaller shops or freelancers to have everything under their control. It's basically like a polished Wordpress ecosystem.