3 ms·
Why sinatra and not rails? I've been trying to teach myself ruby (on rails) for an app idea that I have, and this was great news as I'd been having trouble gett
by sbauch 15y ago
Why sinatra and not rails? I've been trying to teach myself ruby (on rails) for an app idea that I have, and this was great news as I'd been having trouble getting off the ground with rails and the koala gem. But for someone new to programming like myself, it seems like there is a ton more learning materials out there for the rails framework than sinatra.
So in a way this seems to me like a very easy way to get a simple app up and running, but I lose all the help that's out there that's specific to the rails framework. Am I being naive in thinking that the little that I've learned about the rails framework won't apply to sinatra?
- dasil003 15y agoBecause Rails is overkill and tuned for large websites. Most Facebook apps are pretty tiny, so it makes sense to start with a lighter-weight framework.
- compay 15y agoThere are probably lots of reasons, but I'd imagine one of them is that a simple Sinatra app consumes less resources than a simple Rails 3.1 app, and if Heroku is going to be adding tens of thousands of them, the savings probably adds up.
- bgentry 15y agoEach dyno (isolated running process) is given the same type of container to run in and the difference in data storage is trivial (a couple megs of gems). In this case it's more about making it simple to get started. Rails has a fairly large learning curve, and the asset pipeline in 3.1 has only made it worse.