Rails - Aug 2005 - An initial look at Trails

I''m posting this here because I''m sure that there are a few
Rails fans
here who are stuck in Java land at work and willing to consider Trails
as a compromise. ( Web version here:
http://weblog.masukomi.org/index.pl/view/trails )


First let me set the stage I love [Rails](http://www.rubyonrails.com)
but I work in a Java shop. There are two of us here but I''m the only
one who knows any Ruby and we''re looking to add a couple new hires in
the near term and finding a good Java geek is hard enough without
trying to find one who also know Ruby. So we thought "hmm
[Trails](https://trails.dev.java.net) might be  a good compromise.
Simple CRUD and decent default UI should get us 90% of the way there
and we don''t have to teach people Ruby. What follows is my experience
trying to get the crud portion of a very simple Trails app running. 
The kind of thing I did in 10 minutes in RoR... my first time.  It
assumes you know the basics of building a webapp in Java. I attempted
this while watching and emulating the Trails tutorial video which uses
Eclipse to make life easier.

* When you download it you get everything you need: 58 jars and a
decent ant script.
* Now you just need to update to Java 1.5  and ant (I''ll let that
slide since java''s been out for a while, not sure when the latest ant
was released) Fight with your os to make it actually use the new java
and ant versions (not Trails'' fault).
* Now take ant-apt.jar (it came with Trails) and copy it into ant''s
classpath because Eclipse doesn''t seem to pick up on it which means
you can''t get Eclipse to run the ant tasks so you''re going to
have to
run them manually and the fact that the jar is in the lib for the
thing you''re compiling does ant no good.
* now configure the build.properties to tell it where tomcat is (you
can''t compile, never mind run, if it can''t find tomcat) It has
start
jetty and stop jetty ant tasks but i don''t know how it deploys to
jetty and what about the tomcat conf stuff if you''re using jetty?
* follow the tutorial video, track down and configure the hibernate
file that is glossed over, set up your db (also glossed over).. make a
first class...
* ant deploy shoves everything into a war file and starts it up...
everything that is except the hibernate.cfg.xml, the lack of which
causes the new webapp to fail to boot.
* once you manually copy that to the correct place (after each
undeploy, deploy cycle (would make way too much sense to have deploy
undeploy an old deployment)) the webapp boots up and you can now load
your "Welcome to trails" page...which doesn''t have any
reference the
class you made. It''s supposed to... it just doesn''t, which may
have
something to do with the fact that while hibernate successfully
connected to my database it didn''t actually DO anything to it like
oh.... maybe make the table that corresponds to my class like the
video claims? I''m willing to configure it in the class or in the db
but not both if i did that there would be no point in  using a Rails
clone.


now.. setting aside the frustrations of getting the thing running
Trails takes a fundamentally different approach to the database
interaction:

In Rails we make and tweak our db and everything gets reflected
automagically in our classes. End of story.

In Trails you make a class, define the vars, create getters and
setters for all of them, add xdoclet tags for ant to pick up on to all
of your getters, make sure you id getter is first, and (if you''re
using default templates) order the rest of your getters to reflect the
order you want them displayed in in the default layouts. Your IDE can
generally make all the getters and setters for you but you''ll have to
re-order them. Then you run ant which generates the new database
mapping files for you via xdoclet, undeploy and deploy because all
that db mapping stuff is read in at startup (i think... could be wrong
on that ).

Another noteworthy point is that Trails uses Tapestry for its view and
as far as i can tell for the business logic too. Tapestry is an
awesome tool but it''s got a steep learning curve (arguably steeper
than Rails).

End result? Hours and hours spent 1 class made, no tables generated,
hello world page loaded...without my class info.  I quit. I could have
written the app with all the business logic by now if i was using
rails...and that''s assuming it was my first rails app still.

-- 
-Kate
(masukomi-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org)

On Tuesday 02 August 2005 19:28, kate rhodes wrote:
> First let me set the stage I love [Rails](http://www.rubyonrails.com)
> but I work in a Java shop. There are two of us here but I''m the
only
> one who knows any Ruby and we''re looking to add a couple new hires
in
> the near term and finding a good Java geek is hard enough without
> trying to find one who also know Ruby.
I find this argument unconvincing. I agree that, there may be all kinds 
of reasons to use Java and not Ruby/Rails. But any "good Java geek" 
should, in my opinion, first and foremost be a good programmer, 
including the ability to pick up a new language and framework in a 
reasonable time. Knowing the intricacies of Java/J2EE or any other 
specific technology is necessary in practice, of course, but it''s not 
sufficient to make a good programmer.

Incidentally, I''m wondering, has Rails become hot enough to lend itself
to resume-oriented programming?

Michael

-- 
Michael Schuerig                            This is not a false alarm
mailto:michael-q5aiKMLteq4b1SvskN2V4Q@public.gmane.org                        
This is not a test
http://www.schuerig.de/michael/                      --Rush, Red Tide

> I find this argument unconvincing. I agree that, there may be all kinds
> of reasons to use Java and not Ruby/Rails. But any "good Java
geek"
> should, in my opinion, first and foremost be a good programmer,
> including the ability to pick up a new language and framework in a
> reasonable time. 
Given that rails'' approach is modeled heavily on the good stuff from
Java,  and good java programmer will pick up rails in a day or so.
> Incidentally, I''m wondering, has Rails become hot enough to lend
itself
> to resume-oriented programming?
Don''t know about resumes,  but definitely blog-cred-oriented
programming ;)

-- 
Cheers

Koz

Michael Schuerig wrote:
>On Tuesday 02 August 2005 19:28, kate rhodes wrote:
>  
>
>>First let me set the stage I love [Rails](http://www.rubyonrails.com)
>>but I work in a Java shop. There are two of us here but I''m the
only
>>one who knows any Ruby and we''re looking to add a couple new
hires in
>>the near term and finding a good Java geek is hard enough without
>>trying to find one who also know Ruby.
>>    
>>
>
>I find this argument unconvincing. I agree that, there may be all kinds 
>of reasons to use Java and not Ruby/Rails. But any "good Java
geek"
>should, in my opinion, first and foremost be a good programmer, 
>including the ability to pick up a new language and framework in a 
>reasonable time. Knowing the intricacies of Java/J2EE or any other 
>specific technology is necessary in practice, of course, but it''s
not
>sufficient to make a good programmer.
>  
>
Let me back this comment up.  I''m only 23 years old currently, and when
I started programming with Rails, I was coming off of 8 months 
programming in Java for a class at college.  That was the extent of my 
programming experience - outside of a QBasic class in 7th grade if you 
count that one :)

I was reasonably comfortable within the rails framework in about two 
weeks.  Granted, the famous Duane Johnson was my tutor/project lead, but 
I would not consider myself an excellent programmer by any means, and I 
picked it up pretty quickly.  The really Ruby-heavy stuff in the models, 
is still a bit thick for me, because I just don''t know Ruby very well, 
but I can code in Rails fairly well.

Anyhoo, that''s my two cents.

Ben Robison



_______________________________________________
Rails mailing list
Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails

in my opinion a "good" programmer can pick up the basics of almost any
of the modern languages in a day. For the most part the only
difference between most of them is syntax.. Ruby/Java/Perl... they are
all built on the same core rules and data types. There are hardly any
languages alive today that vary significantly. Haskell maybe?

But hiring that person isn''t so easy and justifying them spending time
getting up to speed on ruby when what we really need is a Java geek to
help out with the huge java codebase that is our bread and butter....
that''s hard too.  We''re only 2 developers right now and our
work has
to pay the bills for the 3 other employees and get us in the black. We
need fast java developers and it''s damn hard to justify writing a
second app that only I can really maintain with any speed. Yeah, if i
wasn''t there, my coworker could find his way around as could any
"good" programmer.

The main argument is that we want something that any of us can sit
down at and enhance/bug fix/tweak without having to sit down and learn
a new syntax while Java work piles up behind them. We have enough on
our plates already...

re Rails and Ruby on resumes: YES YES YES
For exactly the same reasons Paul Graham put forward in "The Python
Paradox" http://www.paulgraham.com/pypar.html and "Great Hackers"
http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html

Show up to an interview with us with a resume that speaks proudly of
knowing Ruby, Haskell, or any other language that corporate america
has yet to start throwing haphazardly into powerpoints because it''s
the buzzword du jour and you get bonus points. It shows you''re self
motivated. It shows you''re willing to try new things and think for
yourself.

-Kate


On 8/2/05, Michael Koziarski
<koziarski-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> > I find this argument unconvincing. I agree that, there may be all
kinds
> > of reasons to use Java and not Ruby/Rails. But any "good Java
geek"
> > should, in my opinion, first and foremost be a good programmer,
> > including the ability to pick up a new language and framework in a
> > reasonable time.
> 
> Given that rails'' approach is modeled heavily on the good stuff
from
> Java,  and good java programmer will pick up rails in a day or so.
>

On Tuesday 02 August 2005 19:28, kate rhodes wrote:

 > End result? Hours and hours spent 1 class made, no tables generated,
 > hello world page loaded...without my class info.  I quit. I could have
 > written the app with all the business logic by now if i was using
 > rails...and that''s assuming it was my first rails app still.

It shouldn''t be that hard.

I like Ruby and Rails. After having led the creation of a much less 
incredible web application ''architecture'' in Ruby, which is a
title too
haughty for what we did, I really appreciated what I saw in Rails. I 
understood it very well within a few hours, at least as much as I 
needed to in my experimenting with it. I was hooked.

When I discovered Rails, I discovered what I had been longing for in a 
web application framework. As I was, and still am, developing a web 
application in Java, I became somewhat depressed. It was hard going to 
work; knowing the amount and quality of features that we could be 
developing with Rails, while moving at a snails pace managing all the 
Tapestry assets, made me ill. There was only one thing to do - build 
something like Rails with Java.

It is possible to reduce the complexity you outlined. Convention over 
configuration is a powerful concept that can be realized, to a degree, 
even in a statically typed language like Java. There is
''enough''
reflection. You can''t think like a Java programmer more than you think 
like a Ruby programmer.

So, with fear and trembling I finally introduce Sails. It is running in 
a production environment but in need of lots of work. I invite anyone 
curious enough to learn more to communicate with me through 
sails-rMHxjOMBamphh9+rSnkgNQ@public.gmane.org You may also visit
http://www.javaonsails.org,
where there is a link to an instiki. I only ask that folks keep 
non-constructive criticism to themselves, as this will distract us from 
our real goal: being productive in the environment we are in.

(blip...)

   adam williams

+++++++++++++
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under 
the name of ''liberalism'' they will adopt every fragment of the
Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, 
without knowing how it happened."
                - Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas

[snip good stuff]
> So, with fear and trembling I finally introduce Sails. It is 
> running in a production environment but in need of lots of 
> work. I invite anyone curious enough to learn more to 
> communicate with me through sails-rMHxjOMBamphh9+rSnkgNQ@public.gmane.org
You may
> also visit http://www.javaonsails.org, where there is a link 
> to an instiki. I only ask that folks keep non-constructive 
> criticism to themselves, as this will distract us from our 
> real goal: being productive in the environment we are in.
Wow.  Y''know, it''s no surprise that DHH won an award tonight
when you
have PHP, Python, and now Java taking inspiration from Rails.

So, in that spirit, you go Java-on-Sails, brother!  I hope your
framework kicks butt, too.

[by the way, great logo, too]

Dean Matsueda wrote:
> Wow.  Y''know, it''s no surprise that DHH won an award
tonight when you
> have PHP, Python, and now Java taking inspiration from Rails.
<shameless evagelism>

Don''t forget MonoRail from http://www.castleproject.org/! It is a Rails
lovers'' home away from home when working in .NET.

</shameless evagelism>

+1, From those who must develop in Java, even when we would rather not, 
we salute you :)
>So, in that spirit, you go Java-on-Sails, brother!  I hope your
>framework kicks butt, too.
>  
>


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.0/63 - Release Date: 8/3/2005