why Ruby on Rails is lightweight? , and does it effect on project size or number of website users in the same time? -- Mohamed Saeed software engineer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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''m not sure it''s fair to classify Rails as lightweight any more. It doesn''t have the "everything under the sun" approach of j2ee, and some things are faster (to write), but it takes the New Jersey approach* to a number of problems such that you''ll need to write a bunch of code one way or another. For example: ActiveRecord is fairly simple if you''re mapping an object to one table, but associations can quickly get cumbersome. More cumbersome than XML based configuration files? It probably depends on what parts you find painful. As a gross generalization, Rails apps will have less code, but that''s mostly an artifact of Ruby being terse. As another gross generalization, Rails apps will not perform as well as Java apps for equivalent operations. The argument here is that the Rails app will be done sooner, giving the developers more time to profile, optimize and scale the application. * http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html -faisal On Sep 12, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Mohamed Saeed wrote:> why Ruby on Rails is lightweight? , and does it effect on project > size or number of website users in the same time? > > -- > Mohamed Saeed > software engineer > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Faisal N Jawdat wrote:> Rails apps will not perform as well as Java apps for > equivalent operations. The argument here is that the Rails app will > be done sooner, giving the developers more time to profile, optimize > and scale the application.Also consider that the rise of frameworks like Rails (Django, Symfony, CakePHP) is largely due to the fact that servers are relatively faster these days so more verbose code behind the scenes (like ActiveRecord for ORM) is possible without noticeable lag in response time. So Rails may still be slower than j2ee relatively speaking, and it may not be lightweight (no framework as usable as those mentioned above could be), but it''s still fast enough to be usable and the time that it saves in development is enough to push it''s growth (and unless a majority of end users start complaining that Rails apps are comparatively slow, most developers will take the easy road over the bit-for-bit-optimized-for-speed approach) -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---