I mean, this is why I wrote Nodewood: https://nodewood.com/ https://nodewood.com/ I strongly prefer the explicit nature of JS programming, where you don't have

I mean, this is why I wrote Nodewood: https://nodewood.com/ https://nodewood.com/ I strongly prefer the explicit nature of JS programming, where you don't have to know a bunch of Rails-y magic to know where a certain symbol is coming from, it's just defined in the file you're working in (to pick one example). But I completely agree that the time from Start to CRUD in Rails is a killer app. I keep kicking up new projects in my spare time, and for every one of them, I'd have to set up the application scaffolding, linting, set up a layout and basic design rules, figure out user management, and if I was getting serious, set up subscription management, team management, etc. Rather than rewrite it every time, I figured I could make an actual library out of it so I have a decent base to work from, and then turn it into a product, because I can't be the only one who has these similar issues. Also, Nodewood isn't alone out there - there are all kinds of Rails-ey bootstraps or starter kits out there for all kinds of languages. Now, the fact that everyone thinks "Ruby" and immediately thinks "Rails", but they don't think "Node" and immediately think "and a starter kit" means Rails has performed some amazing marketing mojo, but that doesn't make it fair to compare JavaScript to Rails, the author should be comparing JavaScript to Ruby, or Rails to a Rails-ey bootstrap.