5 ms·
I really liked the tone of this post. It presented an argument, offered alternative viewpoints, and articulated why the author thinks his approach is better th
by swanson 14y ago
I really liked the tone of this post.
It presented an argument, offered alternative viewpoints, and articulated why the author thinks his approach is better than alternatives (without overly attacking them). Code samples were provided with real-life examples.
Whether or not I side with Concerns or DCI or something else, I got value out of reading this post and my understanding of Concerns improved.
This is a welcome relief to what was becoming a tense and drama-filled debate (Rails OOP design). Nice work, dhh.
- mej10 14y agoCan you link to some of this debate? I have always been curious about this drama I hear of. I've never been particularly involved in any programming communities and I am having a hard time imagining what it is like.
- andyroid 14y agohttp://rubydramas.com http://rubydramas.com
- canweriotnow 14y agoHere's some of it: https://twitter.com/garybernhardt/status/280747761773707264 https://twitter.com/garybernhardt/status/280747761773707264 If you want more, just check out the tweets between @dhh, @garybernhardt, and friends on Twitter yesterday. There are also links in there to blog posts and code examples using DCI, DAO, etc. to achieve similar goals. IMHO, this is one of the more interesting debates. Of course, not everything can be adding 'coffeescript' to Gemfile: https://github.com/rails/rails/compare/9333ca7...23aa7da https://github.com/rails/rails/compare/9333ca7...23aa7da
- swanson 14y agoHere's a pretty good starting point: http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com/2012/12/rails-developers-should-take-dci.html http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com/2012/12/rails-developers-sh...