So, I spent 6 hours, wrote 8 lines of code, and I now have a working time-report system.
Thing is, I could have written this in PHP in 200 lines in half the time. I hate Ruby on Rails...
Also Apache dislikes Ruby, and it's slow as fuck.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 14:59
Thing is, I could have written this in PHP in 200 lines in half the time.
You're more familiar with PHP.
and it's slow as fuck.
Yeah. You should hear the excuses Rubyists come up with though.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 15:09
(not the OP)
Is there a way to write web applications in ruby without using the Rails framework? Juste like in PHP : apache, fcgi, etc
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 16:26
Of course. It has a cgi and fcgi module. fuggingoogleit
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 16:30
MORE LIKE RUBY ON FAILS
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 16:57
>>2
that's why Ruby rocks, you can write extensions for any compiled language in a few minutes and use them in your Ruby program, that's how you get the speed with one of the best looking language.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 17:14
Also Apache dislikes Ruby, and it's slow as fuck.
I'd advise you to learn how to configure Apache to use mod_fcgi, but Apache's config file syntax is so insane that I wouldn't want to be responsible for any brain damage you might suffer as a result.
Therefore I'm advising you to install lighttpd and learn how to configure it to use fcgi. Really, it's easy and will make your rails app fly.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 17:35
>>4
mod_ruby and eRuby both hate WinXP
I guess I'll stick with RoR :<
Therefore I'm advising you to install lighttpd and learn how to configure it to use fcgi. Really, it's easy and will make your rails app fly.
that still doesn't change the fact that ruby is slow as fuck.
Indeed fcgi just keeps a pool of interpreters around waiting for the responses - so your initial startup time is minimal. But the ruby program will still take XBOX HUEG time to complete.
You can probably write it in a lot less lines than that, really. You probably just need to google around for some of the PHP frameworks that are equivalent rails. They exist, they just don't have the rabid ruby fanboys constantly shouting about them.
Ruby, as a language, is neat - but it really doesn't have anything that other dynamic languages don't. Even its library isn't all that special. The big thing I keep hearing touted is ActiveRecord, but this is just the same as Class::DBI in Perl.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-14 22:44
but Apache's config file syntax is so insane
I keep hearing this... and I keep not getting it.
LightTPD groupies love to parrot the above, but having looked at LightTPD's config, it doesn't look any simpler to me. Unless you're a machine.
They're both bleh in their own way, but if you think that either of them is complicated (outside mod_rewrite that is), you're an idiot, because they're simple. gtfo/prog/ nub
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-15 4:03
Apache config syntax is just insane. It's most irregular and seems to be made out of tossing completely different, unrelated stuff in.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-15 4:05
Like?
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-15 6:01
>>14
I take it you have some skill in apache configuration?
What I'd want is for any request coming to www.mydomain.com/rails to be forwarded/proxied (preferrably proxied) to localhost:3000. I know I saw a howto a few days ago, but damn if I could find it now...
>>29
Zope3 is ugly. It manages to screw up everything good Python had. Prefer to use something sane.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-17 11:12
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
One word. The forced productivity of programmer. Application development over.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-17 12:47
try using mongrel instead of apache
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-17 12:49
Try shoving a 1880's steam engine up your ass instead of using Ruby on Rails.
>>41
It's asking me if I want to install:
1. CockMongrel 3.2.2 (Ruby)
2. CockMongrel 3.2.2 (Windows)
Which one do I choose?
Irony aside, I've been running mongrel since I gave up on apache, but mongrel is still hideously slow when accessing the page for the first time. We're talking 5 seconds on a 3GHz machine when accessing from localhost. That's not even funny.
>>35
I guess I can get a different job. Maybe writing something in C for a change would be fun. Yeah, Zope's so bad that it makes twiddling bits look like fun.
I can maybe understand some of the design decisions behind it, in an effort to allow Python to scale better... but it's a real pain in the butt.
It doesn't help at all that most my Zope3 queries on Google only turn up SVN commits. Fuck.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-17 21:48
>>44
The best way to scale better is to not be enterprisey, but to be smart. Enterprisey actually makes everything go wrong.
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-18 0:30
You're telling me. :(
Name:
Anonymous2007-02-18 2:53
Enterprisey actually makes everything go wrong.
something which actually happens faster rather than slower in enterprisey. So I guess enterprisey does make some things faster!
I would hereby, for the honor of me and my offspring, like to state that I am >>1 and that I in NO WAY endorse nor appreciate the "Ruby on Rails is slow as fuck" forced meme.