Hi, I''ve read up on RJS and understand the concept/how-to-use. It''s still not clear in my mind when and why to use RJS? Can anyone drop in a couple of bullet points re advantages + when/why would RJS make sense? Thanks --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
RJS makes javascript easy. purchase the 6 dollar tutorial on RJS by orielly. after building the sample application, you will definitly see the benefit vs trying to use ajax. Greg Hauptmann wrote:> Hi, > > I''ve read up on RJS and understand the concept/how-to-use. It''s still > not > clear in my mind when and why to use RJS? Can anyone drop in a couple > of > bullet points re advantages + when/why would RJS make sense? > > Thanks-- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> I''ve read up on RJS and understand the concept/how-to-use. It''s still not > clear in my mind when and why to use RJS? Can anyone drop in a couple of > bullet points re advantages + when/why would RJS make sense?Not really a bullet point, but RJS/ajax makes building a "video player" extremely easy and very friendly... for my player I have a list of channels, a playlist, and the video itself. Click a channel and the only thing that updates is the playlist/video. Click on an entry in the playlist, only the video updates. Click the "next page" link in the playlist, and the playlist updates and the video... Click the "add to favorites" and the only thing that updates is that link with a message that now reads "remove from favorites". Basically it stops me from having to refresh the entire page for every action... -philip --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Tks - so from the point of ease in coding javascript there is an advantageous. What about from a design/architecture/performance perspective? Note I''m asking about the RJS templates concept, not about AJAX (i.e. one could I assume build an AJAX type feature with or without RJS). On 1/17/07, koloa <rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > > RJS makes javascript easy. purchase the 6 dollar tutorial on RJS by > orielly. after building the sample application, you will definitly see > the benefit vs trying to use ajax. > > > Greg Hauptmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I''ve read up on RJS and understand the concept/how-to-use. It''s still > > not > > clear in my mind when and why to use RJS? Can anyone drop in a couple > > of > > bullet points re advantages + when/why would RJS make sense? > > > > Thanks > > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Greg Hauptmann wrote:> Tks - so from the point of ease in coding javascript there is an > advantageous. What about from a design/architecture/performance > perspective?Most applications are multilingual, so most applications should put as much code as possible in one language. Ruby makes "Domain Specific Languages" spectacularily easy, so you should only write raw SQL if you can''t find an ActiveRecord way to do things, and you should only write raw JavaScript if you can''t find an RJS way to do things. The advantage is you can refactor freely, and improve your design, architectures, and development speed, by putting code together by the affinity of its concepts, not by what language it happens to be in. Curiously, I prefer Builder::XmlMarkup over the raw HTML in rhtml files. But HTML is special where we must preserve compatibility with graphic designers... -- Phlip http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---