12 ms·
As Rails founding fathers complained of Java frameworks bloat, today's micro-framework fans complain of Rails bloat. Quite a cycle we've come through, isn't it
by ovi256 15y ago
As Rails founding fathers complained of Java frameworks bloat, today's micro-framework fans complain of Rails bloat. Quite a cycle we've come through, isn't it ?
- tptacek 15y agoHe's not complaining about bloat. Unlike many other high-level languages, Ruby has several viable execution environments (MRI 1.8, MRI 1.9, Rubinius, and JRuby) and Rails works on all of them. OS X ships with a system Ruby. The result seems to be that some people have trouble getting the right combination of runtime and libraries running.
- ovi256 15y agoAnd that's my point, Rails has a lot of functionality that it provides through a lot of dependencies. Exactly the opposite of the self-contained mini-framework (if not micro-) it started as.
- tptacek 15y agoYour first sentence has nothing to do with my point, and your second sentence has a false premise; Rails was never a mini-framework.
- chc 15y agoI don't think it's fair to characterize Rails' early accusations against Java webdev as "The frameworks are too large." They accused Java frameworks of requiring too much ceremony, repetition and verbosity, but I can't think of many instances where early Rails advocates attacked Java for having too many features.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- duaneb 15y agoIs rails technically a microframework? It feels absolutely massive compared to, say, Flask or web.py
- RegEx 15y agoI believe that's the point ovi was trying to make.