Article: Ruby on Rails and J2EE: Is there room for both?

[Aaron Rustad]

There is a new article on IBM developerWorks comparing J2EE and Rails
at an architectural level. It may be of interest to those who are
familiar with J2EE and just getting up to speed on Rails.

http://www-128.ibm.com/develop erworks/web/library/wa-rubyonr ails/

 

[Bill Guindon]

There is a new article on IBM developerWorks comparing J2EE and Rails
at an architectural level. It may be of interest to those who are
familiar with J2EE and just getting up to speed on Rails.
=20
http://www-128.ibm.com/develop erworks/web/library/wa-rubyonr ails/
=20

link.gsub(/\s/, '')
=3D> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/web/library/wa-rubyonrails/

--=20
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)

 

[Bill Guindon]

Finally got a chance to read it. Great stuff! =20

Solid overview of how each stack works, along with a balanced
comparison of the two. It also serves as a good introduction to their
inner workings.

Thx, much.
=20
--=20
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)

 

[James Britt]

There is a new article on IBM developerWorks comparing J2EE and Rails
at an architectural level. It may be of interest to those who are
familiar with J2EE and just getting up to speed on Rails.

How can an article claiming to discuss J2EE not mention EJBs? There is
more to it than servlets and JSPs.

Where's the comparison of doing transactions? Or distributed
applications? Or connection pooling? Or message queues?


James
--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys

 

[Jason Foreman]

=20
How can an article claiming to discuss J2EE not mention EJBs? There is
more to it than servlets and JSPs.
=20
Where's the comparison of doing transactions? Or distributed
applications? Or connection pooling? Or message queues?
=20
=20
James
--

Agreed. The article seems to be a very cursory overview of how a
couple of things are done. There is little mention of most of the EE
aspects of J2EE, probably because they don't really have anything to
compare to in Rails.

Haven't there already been a hundred of this type of comparison
between Rails and XXXX? When are we going to see articles covering
something more interesting or in depth? And why is this categorized
as an "Advanced" article?

And not to pick nits, but the OP could have mentioned that he was the
author of said article.


Jason

 

[Mark Alexander Friedgan]

------=_Part_3025_14028087.1121261178876
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Our company made a decision to use Rails instead of J2EE. We use Rinda=20
instead of message queues and have not yet found a need for distributed=20
transactions(although that is one part that is missing) EJB's are wonderful=
=20
but really how are they different from models or correctly developed servic=
e=20
classes ?=20

Mark

=20

=20
=20
Agreed. The article seems to be a very cursory overview of how a
couple of things are done. There is little mention of most of the EE
aspects of J2EE, probably because they don't really have anything to
compare to in Rails.
=20
Haven't there already been a hundred of this type of comparison
between Rails and XXXX? When are we going to see articles covering
something more interesting or in depth? And why is this categorized
as an "Advanced" article?
=20
And not to pick nits, but the OP could have mentioned that he was the
author of said article.
=20
=20
Jason
=20

------=_Part_3025_14028087.1121261178876--

 

[James Britt]

Our company made a decision to use Rails instead of J2EE. We use Rinda
instead of message queues and have not yet found a need for distributed
transactions(although that is one part that is missing) EJB's are wonderful
but really how are they different from models or correctly developed service
classes ?

It's not so much that one can find acceptable alternatives to these
things in Ruby, but that the J2EE spec defines many things that have no
counterpart in Rails. That one can roll their own code and add it to a
Ruby app is obviously a good thing, but the article did not bother
addressing theses things.

Instead, the author looked at Rails, then found some approximate version
of the same features in Java, and presented the latter as being J2EE. A
better title might have been, "Ruby on Rails and Struts: Is there room
for both?" But that's not as sexy.

Such a comparison is useful and may encourage people to move from Java
to Ruby. But people more familiar with J2EE may see this particular
article as just more Rails hype, a biased, willfully-ignorant
comparison, in which case Rails (and Ruby) come off looking bad.



James

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys