24 ms·
This came across to me as a long rambling rant which amongst other things interchangeably referred to ruby as both "ruby" and "rails", but i got the feeling it
by jamesu 15y ago
This came across to me as a long rambling rant which amongst other things interchangeably referred to ruby as both "ruby" and "rails", but i got the feeling it was more about bashing rails.
Rebuilding something because the older stuff is is "bloated" and the new stuff is somehow superior always seems like a weak excuse to me. The new stuff quickly becomes the old "bloated" stuff and you're back to square 1. In fact I have no doubt that within 5 years something else new will come along and perhaps Giles will be writing another article about "Node Went Off The Script: Why I'm Rebuilding Clyde In TheNextBestThing".
Personally I would rather concentrate on making something which is actually good in its own right.
- batista 15y agoIn fact I have no doubt that within 5 years something else new will come along and perhaps Giles will be writing another article about "Node Went Off The Script: Why I'm Rebuilding Clyde In TheNextBestThing" Which possibillity he mentions in TFA. But this is what we call progress (or, to a more bitter viewpoint) change. It doesn't stop.
- hello_moto 15y agoAside from async, I don't see a single drop of progress moving from Rails to Node.JS.
- ascendant 15y agoMuch smaller memory footprint, faster execution times, consistency of writing your server code and client code in the same language, etc. You could say all of these things are subjective, but so is the word "progress".