4 ms·

Thanks for putting this together Steve. Your work, and those of the Rails contributors is amazing stuff. I know this past year has been a pain from a security p

Thanks for putting this together Steve. Your work, and those of the Rails contributors is amazing stuff. I know this past year has been a pain from a security perspective but as a framework matures and adds n+ features, it is an inevitable outcome. For me, my wish list would be: - Down with helpers. Or, at least the ability to arbitrarily set them. Maybe push presenter as alternatives? - Some native performance tuning/testing/reporting would be awesome. Gems like rack-mini-profiler and ruby-prof are great, but a near-native tool, opinionated at that, would be awesome. - I personally love the decorator pattern that gems like Spree use. Unfortunately (and maybe this is my own failing), eval'ing filters/callbacks is a big pain. - As mentioned in another comment, the env specific configuration provided by figaro is awesome and should be native in Rails. Specifically, it might be a welcome alternative to the secret_token issue. - Most deployment tools (Capistrano/Mina) enforce a different folder structure. It might be helpful to include some of them by default, or provide configurable options/symlinks that will work out of the box. I have a lot more items on my list but those are the top items that I can think of at the moment.

steveklabnik 13y ago
Thanks! I'm sure you know that I'm a big fan of presenters, maintaining one of the most popular gems that implements them, but they've generally been deemed a bit too heavy of a pattern in the past. What do you mean by 'arbitrarily set them'? There were performance tests, but nobody used them, so we pulled them out to a gem in 4.0. Can you give me an example of the eval problem? Not familliar with it.
- purephase 13y ago
  Steve, thanks for following-up. For point one, I mean that developers have free range with helper definitions and that they eventually find their way into controllers. Interesting news about performance tests in <4. I didn't realize that, I'll check them out. The eval problem is as follows (typically if you have to eval something in a gem): class Foo < ActiveRecord::Base before_save :bar .. end Foo.class_eval do # I want to remove before_save callback here without having to redefine it. before_save :bar ... def bar return end end It's not a big deal, just adds clutter. Thanks again!

steveklabnik 13y ago

Thanks! I'm sure you know that I'm a big fan of presenters, maintaining one of the most popular gems that implements them, but they've generally been deemed a bit too heavy of a pattern in the past. What do you mean by 'arbitrarily set them'? There were performance tests, but nobody used them, so we pulled them out to a gem in 4.0. Can you give me an example of the eval problem? Not familliar with it.

purephase 13y ago
Steve, thanks for following-up. For point one, I mean that developers have free range with helper definitions and that they eventually find their way into controllers. Interesting news about performance tests in <4. I didn't realize that, I'll check them out. The eval problem is as follows (typically if you have to eval something in a gem): class Foo < ActiveRecord::Base before_save :bar .. end Foo.class_eval do # I want to remove before_save callback here without having to redefine it. before_save :bar ... def bar return end end It's not a big deal, just adds clutter. Thanks again!