Another reason Rails doesn't suck

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Phlip, Sep 10, 2006.

  1. Phlip

    Phlip Guest

    Rubies:

    I got to the deceased equine flagellation party late, so I will find a
    different angle.

    Read:

    http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ConfigurationHell

    That page lampoons a very well-regarded and highly successful servlet engine
    called Tomcat. (Written in a language whose name begins with J.)

    Installing and configuring Tomcat is a total pain in the sphincter. The
    system depends on endless configuration files, in various languages, with
    invisible connections between them, and no "trail of breadcrumbs" to lead
    you through everything. If you get one line item wrong, the system will
    might provide a log file, and might provide a cryptic error message. This
    might lead you to the wrong module and config file, looking in the wrong
    place to supply a fix. If you then screw that file up, you can't tell if the
    new error message is progress or a regression.

    Now compare Tomcat to our least un-favorite servlet system. Rails prefers
    "convention over configuration". That seems like a new nuisance; for
    example, some database table names must be plural (or something like that).

    It's not a nuisance. The comparison to Tomcat illustrates just how powerful
    this weak but flexible concept can get!

    --
    Phlip
    http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!
     
    Phlip, Sep 10, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Phlip <> wrote:
    > Now compare Tomcat to our least un-favorite servlet system. Rails prefers
    > "convention over configuration". That seems like a new nuisance; for
    > example, some database table names must be plural (or something like that).
    >
    > It's not a nuisance. The comparison to Tomcat illustrates just how powerful
    > this weak but flexible concept can get!


    For English speaking countries.
     
    Stefan Scholl, Sep 10, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Phlip wrote:
    > That page lampoons a very well-regarded and highly successful servlet engine
    > called Tomcat. (Written in a language whose name begins with J.)
    >


    To be honest, Tomcat is even by some people who like said unnamed
    language considered a baroque beast. And Apache couldn't write
    documentation to save their lives. You're beating a dead horse in the
    wrong place here.

    > Installing and configuring Tomcat is a total pain in the sphincter.
    >


    I see your Tomcat, and I raise you by Oracle Express Edition on Ubuntu /
    Debian. Which won't even -start up- out of the box when installed from a
    deb because their preinst and postinst scripts are buggy. Yay IT.
    Tomcat at least lets you go with defaults and blissfully ignore all
    config files that aren't your WEB-INF/web.xml when you just need a
    development setup.

    > It's not a nuisance. The comparison to Tomcat illustrates just how powerful
    > this weak but flexible concept can get!
    >


    It's the very opposite of flexible, actually, in that it strictly binds
    you to What They Know Better. Which works, and works well, until you
    find that one edge case where it doesn't, and you're screwed. It's
    cushy, but as it stands, it's actually a limitation

    Where I work there's probably more people talking German than English,
    and a lot of development gets done in Slovak - complete with code
    identifiers (the documentation is easier to access if you don't have to
    map from slovak legalese to geekish all the time.) Rails table name
    conventions that can't be overriden short of jumping through some major
    hoops have the usefulness of a chocolate teapot in that environment.

    David Vallner

    PS: Java trolls. GO HOME!
     
    David Vallner, Sep 10, 2006
    #3
  4. Phlip

    Phlip Guest

    Stefan Scholl wrote:

    >> "convention over configuration"


    > For English speaking countries.


    Shouldn't a team already be practicing Ubiquitous Language? whatever its
    base?

    David Vallner wrote:

    > I see your Tomcat, and I raise you by Oracle Express Edition on Ubuntu /
    > Debian.


    Whip me. Beat me. Make me install Oracle.

    --
    Phlip
    http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!
     
    Phlip, Sep 10, 2006
    #4
  5. > To be honest, Tomcat is even by some people who like said unnamed
    > language considered a baroque beast. And Apache couldn't write
    > documentation to save their lives. You're beating a dead horse in the
    > wrong place here.


    Hey! We try to get the docs at least 50% right :) - for bad docs I
    point to the poster child #1 hibernate - only way to get even
    semi-decent docs is to buy a book

    >
    > > Installing and configuring Tomcat is a total pain in the sphincter.
    > >

    >


    It's really not that bad by itself, but when you add in the large
    amount of thirdparty cruft that most Java web-apps require, yes it
    becomes a pain.

    > I see your Tomcat, and I raise you by Oracle Express Edition on Ubuntu /
    > Debian. Which won't even -start up- out of the box when installed from a
    > .deb because their preinst and postinst scripts are buggy. Yay IT.


    Oracle 10g for linux out of the box will not install - the install
    shell files have hard-coded directory names for the engineers pesonal
    workstations - you have to edit these shell scripts yourself after
    downloading gigabytes of crap (why no cli installer?), and at the end
    of your frustrating hell of installation + fixes to Oracle's own code
    you get a crappy web interface - even 9i had an application to control
    the db (as bad as it was). 10g is a hell of a mess - right now a
    decent db with good support could take a fair-sized chunk out of the
    Oracle market-share, it's just not going to happen when for not.net
    projects it's the de-facto 'enterprise' db. - And all this is on the
    Oracle supported platform Redhat enterprise.

    > PS: Java trolls. GO HOME!


    Ok I'll get me coat...

    Kev
     
    Kevin Jackson, Sep 10, 2006
    #5
  6. Phlip wrote:
    > Stefan Scholl wrote:
    >
    >>> "convention over configuration"

    >
    >> For English speaking countries.

    >
    > Shouldn't a team already be practicing Ubiquitous Language? whatever its
    > base?
    >


    Tell that to existing in-house codebases. Also, you "are allowed" to
    other languages if you're sure noone that can't speak that language will
    ever have to read the code. Which just so happens to be a not really
    rare situation, and you can't really think bad of developers that prefer
    to code in their native language when it's permissible.

    David Vallner
     
    David Vallner, Sep 10, 2006
    #6
  7. Re: [OT - Again] Another reason Rails doesn't suck

    Kevin Jackson wrote:
    > Hey! We try to get the docs at least 50% right :) - for bad docs I
    > point to the poster child #1 hibernate - only way to get even
    > semi-decent docs is to buy a book
    >


    Well, Hani of bileblog's quotes from the Axis 2 API and docs are pretty
    scary too. Although the link to Tomcat's DefaultServlet source was also
    enlightening.

    > and at the end
    > of your frustrating hell of installation + fixes to Oracle's own code


    And here I thought giving up when sqlplus rejected the SYSTEM password I
    told the configuration 60 seconds before was being persistent...

    David Vallner
     
    David Vallner, Sep 10, 2006
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. supercobra
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    639
    Roedy Green
    Jan 10, 2006
  2. Christopher Benson-Manica

    Re: TDD doesn't suck

    Christopher Benson-Manica, Aug 10, 2006, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    390
    Keith Thompson
    Aug 10, 2006
  3. Phlip

    TDD doesn't suck

    Phlip, Aug 10, 2006, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    869
    goose
    Aug 21, 2006
  4. jean vacance
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    159
    m4dc4p
    Jan 13, 2006
  5. Tore Darell
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    178
Loading...

Share This Page