4 ms·

I don't think this comparison is accurate at all. I suspect the author has only used Snap and not Yesod. Actually I don't know if there is a single Haskell prog

I don't think this comparison is accurate at all. I suspect the author has only used Snap and not Yesod. Actually I don't know if there is a single Haskell programmer that has seriously tried all three web frameworks.

papsosouid 15y ago
As someone who gave up on yesod because it is so railsish and moved to snap, I'd say it is pretty accurate.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
  - papsosouid 15y ago
    I'm not sure what code examples would do, you could use the examples on the yesod site. It isn't a case of "yesod can't do X", it was just out of the 5 people who tried it, 4 voted no. You can't "fix" yesod when it isn't broken, and I think trying to cater to my subjective preferences would simply alienate the people who like yesod. Your characterization of my posts as trolling is both inaccurate and unnecessary. Having a different opinion is not trolling.
- cies 15y ago
  > gave up on yesod because it is so railsish So what exactly do you feel is bad about "railsishness"? I think Rails brought a lot of sane defaults and best-practices to a web framework.. I'm not surprised to see nearly all web frameworks that came after it borrow from it. See for instance "Play" on Java/Scala -- very new, very Rails.
maxcan 15y ago
As someone who loves yesod, this feels kind of accurate, but I don't see it as a bad thing. Yesod is what a type-safe Rails should look like.
- cies 15y ago
  Type-safe, pure-functional Rails; or simply Rails in Haskell. So not OO, and (opinion warning) a lot less "magic". Template Haskell and QuasiQuoting can be seen as "magic", but I dont think so; they are actually very transparent ways of making small DSLs (a common practice in Ruby-land) w/o the "Ruby magic" needed to create them.
danieldk 15y ago
Could you please use arguments, rather than fallacies? I already said that I primarily have experience with Snap. But I did research both Snap and Yesod before using Snap. Or from the horse's mouth: Snap: "Snap is a simple web development framework for unix systems, written in the Haskell programming language." Source: http://snapframework.com/ http://snapframework.com/ The Yesod book: "The Haskell community is constantly pushing the boundaries finding the cleanest, most efficient solutions for each challenge. The downside of such a powerful ecosystem is the complexity of choice. By using Yesod, you will already have most of the tools chosen for you, and you can be guaranteed they work together." Source: http://www.yesodweb.com/ http://www.yesodweb.com/
- gregwebs 15y ago
  I am very surprised that you think you can make accurate comparisons through googling! But perhaps this points to a documentation problem with Yesod. I am probably being entirely too harsh here. It is just that when you call something "elaborate" that is not an objective statement taken from the docs. You were probably trying to phrase things in an objective way, but I think every developer views "elaborate" as having a very bad connotation. I also disagree with the Sinatra vs. Rails comparison for various reasons, but I don't want to spend time arguing analogies.

papsosouid 15y ago

As someone who gave up on yesod because it is so railsish and moved to snap, I'd say it is pretty accurate.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- papsosouid 15y ago
  I'm not sure what code examples would do, you could use the examples on the yesod site. It isn't a case of "yesod can't do X", it was just out of the 5 people who tried it, 4 voted no. You can't "fix" yesod when it isn't broken, and I think trying to cater to my subjective preferences would simply alienate the people who like yesod. Your characterization of my posts as trolling is both inaccurate and unnecessary. Having a different opinion is not trolling.
cies 15y ago
> gave up on yesod because it is so railsish So what exactly do you feel is bad about "railsishness"? I think Rails brought a lot of sane defaults and best-practices to a web framework.. I'm not surprised to see nearly all web frameworks that came after it borrow from it. See for instance "Play" on Java/Scala -- very new, very Rails.

maxcan 15y ago

As someone who loves yesod, this feels kind of accurate, but I don't see it as a bad thing. Yesod is what a type-safe Rails should look like.

cies 15y ago
Type-safe, pure-functional Rails; or simply Rails in Haskell. So not OO, and (opinion warning) a lot less "magic". Template Haskell and QuasiQuoting can be seen as "magic", but I dont think so; they are actually very transparent ways of making small DSLs (a common practice in Ruby-land) w/o the "Ruby magic" needed to create them.

danieldk 15y ago

Could you please use arguments, rather than fallacies? I already said that I primarily have experience with Snap. But I did research both Snap and Yesod before using Snap. Or from the horse's mouth: Snap: "Snap is a simple web development framework for unix systems, written in the Haskell programming language." Source: http://snapframework.com/ http://snapframework.com/ The Yesod book: "The Haskell community is constantly pushing the boundaries finding the cleanest, most efficient solutions for each challenge. The downside of such a powerful ecosystem is the complexity of choice. By using Yesod, you will already have most of the tools chosen for you, and you can be guaranteed they work together." Source: http://www.yesodweb.com/ http://www.yesodweb.com/

gregwebs 15y ago
I am very surprised that you think you can make accurate comparisons through googling! But perhaps this points to a documentation problem with Yesod. I am probably being entirely too harsh here. It is just that when you call something "elaborate" that is not an objective statement taken from the docs. You were probably trying to phrase things in an objective way, but I think every developer views "elaborate" as having a very bad connotation. I also disagree with the Sinatra vs. Rails comparison for various reasons, but I don't want to spend time arguing analogies.