4 ms·
> Large applications written in Rails won't run fast, might be ridden with bugs and might be hard to maintain and extend. With care, none of that is necessaril
by loktarogar 2y ago
> Large applications written in Rails won't run fast, might be ridden with bugs and might be hard to maintain and extend.
With care, none of that is necessarily true. I think that's an overgeneralisation.
I've worked with many large, bug free, stable and easy to modify rails apps. I've also worked with messy rats nests rails apps, and go apps, etc.
It can be true that some languages/frameworks make it easier to get into that state, but all have a chance to make that a possibility, or other trade offs that make it difficult to build with for other reasons. With discipline you can make anything work.
- t-writescode 2y agoI think the biggest difference for me is that when there's a rat's nest of a Rails application, refactoring it becomes the hell of type errors and writing tests that, frankly, a compiler would catch. And with sufficiently large applications, those issues really start to spread through the whole program - or can. addendum: I'd love to know why I'm getting downvoted here. I definitely speak from experience, here.
- cageface 2y agoThis is my experience as well. Rails makes it incredibly easy to get a web app off the ground but as it grows and adds more features and complex business logic it becomes much more difficult to maintain than a codebase with static type checking.
- loktarogar 2y agoI guess my point was that, with discipline, it's not a foregone conclusion that a Rails app is going to be a rats nest. The lows can be pretty low for sure. But it's one of the tradeoffs for the framework and one that can be mitigated with thought and effort.