4 ms·

Developer Productivity in Rails means having a self-righteous excuse for hard-coding vital, tunable elements of your app and pretending you didn't just do that.

Developer Productivity in Rails means having a self-righteous excuse for hard-coding vital, tunable elements of your app and pretending you didn't just do that. A rails app is constantly under "development" because so much of it is just plain hard-coded in place under the guise of MVC and its single model of persistence: Active Record. Down-vote all you want. We've reached the turning point where you hear far more about big companies moving from rails, than switching to it.

h2s 13y ago
I don't think there's enough attention on the fact that the strict MVC approach of big old school web frameworks like Rails is an increasingly glaring architectural dead-end. The "model" part of an MVC application is invariably far too complex to crowbar inside a couple of dozen Active Record subclasses. And you can't prescribe a one-size-fits-all architecture for the model from a framework level. That part has to emerge from the business and technical constraints of the specific application in order to be correct.
- tomphoolery 13y ago
  What you're overlooking here is the "model" part of an MVC application is not limited to being an Active Record object. Indeed, many experienced Rails developers are also major proponents of the use of service objects and "domain models" which can exist outside of the database. The misunderstanding of when an MVC architecture is appropriate, and when to (and not to) use the framework, is the mark of someone who has not yet really understood how to use Rails effectively.
anko 13y ago
> We've reached the turning point where you hear far more about big companies moving from rails, than switching to it. A lot of this is because 1) they jumped on the rails bandwagon without understanding it or if it suited their needs 2) after using rails to prototype their site, they now understand what their architecture should look like and want to start fresh 3) because they've joined the next circle jerk such ask nodejs All the rest of your post is overly vague, or simply untrue. People pick rails because it has sane defaults eg. ActiveRecord but there are plenty of other gems for other database persistence layers.

h2s 13y ago

I don't think there's enough attention on the fact that the strict MVC approach of big old school web frameworks like Rails is an increasingly glaring architectural dead-end. The "model" part of an MVC application is invariably far too complex to crowbar inside a couple of dozen Active Record subclasses. And you can't prescribe a one-size-fits-all architecture for the model from a framework level. That part has to emerge from the business and technical constraints of the specific application in order to be correct.

tomphoolery 13y ago
What you're overlooking here is the "model" part of an MVC application is not limited to being an Active Record object. Indeed, many experienced Rails developers are also major proponents of the use of service objects and "domain models" which can exist outside of the database. The misunderstanding of when an MVC architecture is appropriate, and when to (and not to) use the framework, is the mark of someone who has not yet really understood how to use Rails effectively.

anko 13y ago

> We've reached the turning point where you hear far more about big companies moving from rails, than switching to it. A lot of this is because 1) they jumped on the rails bandwagon without understanding it or if it suited their needs 2) after using rails to prototype their site, they now understand what their architecture should look like and want to start fresh 3) because they've joined the next circle jerk such ask nodejs All the rest of your post is overly vague, or simply untrue. People pick rails because it has sane defaults eg. ActiveRecord but there are plenty of other gems for other database persistence layers.