4 ms·
Padrino is nice, too. It's definitely more mature than Happy, and a little more complex I guess. Now I'm thinking about trying to port the `def route` style dis
by moeffju 14y ago
Padrino is nice, too. It's definitely more mature than Happy, and a little more complex I guess. Now I'm thinking about trying to port the `def route` style dispatch to Padrino, because I still feel that it's superior to the `method url, options do` pattern. That might just be the Happy excitement talking, however.
- cheald 14y agoWhy do you feel it's superior? It feels distinctly clunkier to me. I'm not opposed to new things, but powerful DSLs are one of Ruby's best perks.
- moeffju 14y agoBecause then you have to handle things like route precedence, method routing, "resource" mapping, etc. The `def route` way is very linear, you have one point of entry and that's it, the code just flows from there. With a bunch of `match /xyz` statements, or even a routing layer, the connection is less direct and potentially more prone to bugs.