Re:Rails: It's great! (but doesn't work)
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
Rails' MySQL client has supported the new authentication protocol since shortly after the part 1 of Rolling with Ruby on Rails was published. Part 2 mentions this.
Re:Article's examples dont work
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
Yes, this *was* due to server overload (the slashdot effect). Its been mirrored now, so I hope there won't be any more problems.
Re:Suspicious until...
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
The Ajax support in Rails does have the ability to degrade gracefully. I just didn't cover that aspect in my article.
In raw capability, JavaScript and Ruby are very similar, its just that JavaScript is messier and Ruby is much cleaner. That's how I originally found Ruby... when looking for a cleaner alternative to JavaScript (which I already loved).
Re:The Straight Scoop On AJAX & RoR here...
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
I'm not going to go into a detailed rebuttal like the previous poster, but you've really missed the point. The only real generation of code are the helpers that create initial skeletons, no different than what IDEA or Eclipse do for you when you want a new class. These are starting point templates, no the sort of thing that the terms "round trip" or "two way" geneneration even apply.
Your generation comments on Rails are completely wrong. You would realize this if you tried it.
Slashdot Mirror
FastCGI is the best way to run a production Rails app. There are many web hosts supporting Ruby on Rails, see:
S upport
http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/show/Commercial
which lists eight such web hosts.
Rails' MySQL client has supported the new authentication protocol since shortly after the part 1 of Rolling with Ruby on Rails was published. Part 2 mentions this.
Yes, this *was* due to server overload (the slashdot effect). Its been mirrored now, so I hope there won't be any more problems.
The Ajax support in Rails does have the ability to degrade gracefully. I just didn't cover that aspect in my article.
In raw capability, JavaScript and Ruby are very similar, its just that JavaScript is messier and Ruby is much cleaner. That's how I originally found Ruby... when looking for a cleaner alternative to JavaScript (which I already loved).
I'm not going to go into a detailed rebuttal like the previous poster, but you've really missed the point. The only real generation of code are the helpers that create initial skeletons, no different than what IDEA or Eclipse do for you when you want a new class. These are starting point templates, no the sort of thing that the terms "round trip" or "two way" geneneration even apply.
Your generation comments on Rails are completely wrong. You would realize this if you tried it.
This was caused by the slashdot-overload-effect. It is now being mirrored.
Prototype, the library used in Rails, is completely object oriented.
It looks like the ISP's entire server is down, not just this particular web app.
Not just prettier and lower bandwdith, by way more capable. Try doing what Google Maps does using iframes!