Didn't you get enough arguments with Rails users last time?
Paradox, I don't remember getting much arguments, I do remember getting much flames and trolls.
I'm not sure anyone has told you that a lot of stuff that was included in Ta-da's linecount was done so only because of an ideal of fairness. Caching, for instance, is used for the first time in Ta-da List (and is prepared for extraction). So it goes into the linecount. Personally, I wouldn't have included these things. They were extracted into the framework.
Oh, and in DHH's 'says-it-all' comparison screenshot, the list act is not in Ta-Da but in the framework, so don't come telling me it was extracted afterwards.
Your point is not well-served by throwing a tantrum every time Rails gets some positive press. Take the moral high ground.
I only react to posts that attack me directly, like the one that started the thread, don't pull things out of context again.
Yes I did exactly what I said I'd do and a lot more. I keep having to explain things over and over again to you Rails activists, but you seem to be unable to understand anything that is only just slightly different from the concepts that you use.
So you're saying that you actually manage to look elsewhere than the src/templates directory? You look in
the web directory instead and call.lzx Laszlo files, templates. Even though they have nothing to do with templates? They are a SEPARATE application, and everything can be done without it. Oh, and btw, Ta-da Lists's template line count was not taken into account into the 600 lines, so stop whining. Rails' templates contain logic and loops, RIFE's not. I actually included those loops in the line-count instead of leaving them out.
You guys continue to amaze me, so you write an even more simple to-do list with Rails that does some Ajax eye-candy and only does account management and list editing. Let's take a look, will ya:
no public sharing,
no private sharing,
no RSS,
no item reordering,
no list reordering,
no different presentation of done lists,
no 'nice shrinking/growing' icon,
no list emailing,
....
and you still manage to let it be a hefty 340 lines in you awesome concise framework? You just confirmed that you never take the time to check ANY of your statements and just troll on senselessly in the direction of whoever is leading you. SAD! Btw, I'd wouldn't call Bla-bla a RIFE-optimised application at all. Quite the contrary in fact, almost nothing is used of the important features of RIFE. The application is so simple that you never get to leverage any of the benefits since there's never any data flowing around. They are all single actions. I'd rather call Ta-da optimized for Rails since you have your List Act which does all the list handling automatically in the framework. We don't consider CRUD operations a core feature, but will soon release RIFE/crud as a separate packages that address this without any code generation. Bla-bla List doesn't use any of that btw.
Which configuration? This is what you call configuration? I hate to bring it to you, but it's not configuration. It's separation and declaration of the application's logic and data flow which brings an enormous collection of features that you wouldn't even understand since you marvel at your pityful one-dimensional controllers. Once more, you seem to be totally deluded since I DID COUNT the lines of that file in the final line count since I checked with my friend Brian McCallister, who knows Rails quite well, to see if I should include it. I'm still not that sure I should have since the features it gives you are completely impossible to do with Rails. If you're interested in that, start using a real name, be a man and we'll have some extensive chat about that elsewhere.
Oh, don't worry, I don't comment on your code with micro comparisons as Rails activists seem to love to do. I do comment on the fact that you only implemented 15% of the application and did none of the complicated stuff./golfclap you just made a total jerk out of yourself, Matt McRay.
Last time I checked, I didn't win the contest (since I came out 300 lines more), but even more, I never did one. All I did was show Java developers that things can be concise and don't have to be totally convoluted. Which rules did I set? I faithfully cloned Ta-da List even though the 'Edit list' part is very stupid and I'll probably re-do it in-line in the GUI. I used Laszlo to build a separated application which has nothing to do with the server-side and merely interfaces with the REST API and interpretes the results that are sent back. It's sad that you don't seem to understa
That has nothing to do with a server-side framework, now does it. Bla-bla has currently a UI that's built with OpenLaszlo as an experiment to see how development with that goes. I'm not a Flash fan either, but imho the result is quite acceptable if you put your flaming aside. OpenLaszlo is going to target other runtimes soon and the Laszlo UI merely uses Bla-bla list's REST API. So it's just one client, others will follow since I'm actually interested in the possibilities of RIA technologies and really want to try them out instead of just talking into thin air and shooting something out of the sky without even knowing what I'm talking about.
Except that they were not written by the same people, so they both had to do the same effort of analysing the application. Also the features are quite different, for instance:
Bla-bla List has a complete REST API that sits in the middle of the GUI and the actual web application.
you can continue editing even if your session times out
private sharing is done securely
public lists have meaningful URLs
So there's a lot more to compare than just a screenshot that doesn't do anything constructive and just tries to hype a concise part of the RoR version.
The fact that Ta-da took 600 loc and Bla-bla 900 seems to be totally ignored by Rails advocates and they all keep chanting 'that screenshot says it all'. No it doesn't, since the loc factor is 2/3, not 1/14. Ta-da is probably just more verbose elsewhere, but that's impossible to compare since it's not open-source.
RelativeLayers is a Javascript library for creating dynamic designs that adapt themselves to the user's browser dimension. It supports Netscape, Internet Explorer, Mozilla, Konqueror and Opera. Lots of website design concepts have been re-thought and optimized.
RelativeLayers unifies web design and takes it a step further by introducing features such as error handling, browser detection, real-time moving / resizing / clipping, relative positioning and dimensioning, external page embedding, a revised event model, automatic limit enforcement, drag & drop and a lot more.
Personally I've switched all my projects to Subversion. It's simply the easiest to use and most versalite SCM software that I've ever used. The price is also great since as long as you participate in open logging you don't have to pay. Before I was using AccuRev and besides the fact that it's not distributed it's a marvel (http://www.accurev.com). The gui tools are excellent and the support team is very helpful.
There is one that's supporting 2.4 since the test versions... RockLinux (http://www.rocklinux.org) the development snapshots already support 2.4 final. Glad to find out it existed since I like customizing my distribution a lot and RockLinux makes this very easy.
Slashdot Mirror
... and Paradox, please stop saying things without verifying the facts:
I traced the list act (mixin) back to december 8, thus one and a half month before the Ta-da release.
Didn't you get enough arguments with Rails users last time?
Paradox, I don't remember getting much arguments, I do remember getting much flames and trolls.
I'm not sure anyone has told you that a lot of stuff that was included in Ta-da's linecount was done so only because of an ideal of fairness. Caching, for instance, is used for the first time in Ta-da List (and is prepared for extraction). So it goes into the linecount. Personally, I wouldn't have included these things. They were extracted into the framework.
Fyi, I asked details about what went in the linecount exactly in the comments here: http://weblog.rubyonrails.com/archives/2005/01/19/ make-your-ta-da-list-today/
Oh, and in DHH's 'says-it-all' comparison screenshot, the list act is not in Ta-Da but in the framework, so don't come telling me it was extracted afterwards.
Your point is not well-served by throwing a tantrum every time Rails gets some positive press. Take the moral high ground.
I only react to posts that attack me directly, like the one that started the thread, don't pull things out of context again.
Btw, I duplicated and corrected some parts of my reply on my blog:s t_criticisms
http://rifers.org/blogs/gbevin/2005/4/5/blabla_li
Yes I did exactly what I said I'd do and a lot more. I keep having to explain things over and over again to you Rails activists, but you seem to be unable to understand anything that is only just slightly different from the concepts that you use.
and you still manage to let it be a hefty 340 lines in you awesome concise framework? You just confirmed that you never take the time to check ANY of your statements and just troll on senselessly in the direction of whoever is leading you. SAD! Btw, I'd wouldn't call Bla-bla a RIFE-optimised application at all. Quite the contrary in fact, almost nothing is used of the important features of RIFE. The application is so simple that you never get to leverage any of the benefits since there's never any data flowing around. They are all single actions. I'd rather call Ta-da optimized for Rails since you have your List Act which does all the list handling automatically in the framework. We don't consider CRUD operations a core feature, but will soon release RIFE/crud as a separate packages that address this without any code generation. Bla-bla List doesn't use any of that btw.
Oh, don't worry, I don't comment on your code with micro comparisons as Rails activists seem to love to do. I do comment on the fact that you only implemented 15% of the application and did none of the complicated stuff. /golfclap you just made a total jerk out of yourself, Matt McRay.
Last time I checked, I didn't win the contest (since I came out 300 lines more), but even more, I never did one. All I did was show Java developers that things can be concise and don't have to be totally convoluted. Which rules did I set? I faithfully cloned Ta-da List even though the 'Edit list' part is very stupid and I'll probably re-do it in-line in the GUI. I used Laszlo to build a separated application which has nothing to do with the server-side and merely interfaces with the REST API and interpretes the results that are sent back. It's sad that you don't seem to understa
That has nothing to do with a server-side framework, now does it. Bla-bla has currently a UI that's built with OpenLaszlo as an experiment to see how development with that goes. I'm not a Flash fan either, but imho the result is quite acceptable if you put your flaming aside. OpenLaszlo is going to target other runtimes soon and the Laszlo UI merely uses Bla-bla list's REST API. So it's just one client, others will follow since I'm actually interested in the possibilities of RIA technologies and really want to try them out instead of just talking into thin air and shooting something out of the sky without even knowing what I'm talking about.
Except that they were not written by the same people, so they both had to do the same effort of analysing the application. Also the features are quite different, for instance:
So there's a lot more to compare than just a screenshot that doesn't do anything constructive and just tries to hype a concise part of the RoR version.
The fact that Ta-da took 600 loc and Bla-bla 900 seems to be totally ignored by Rails advocates and they all keep chanting 'that screenshot says it all'. No it doesn't, since the loc factor is 2/3, not 1/14. Ta-da is probably just more verbose elsewhere, but that's impossible to compare since it's not open-source.
For people interested in DHTML, RelativeLayers can be a very helpful toolkit :
http://www.uwyn.com/projects/relativelayers/indexFrom the project description :
RelativeLayers is a Javascript library for creating dynamic designs that adapt themselves to the user's browser dimension. It supports Netscape, Internet Explorer, Mozilla, Konqueror and Opera. Lots of website design concepts have been re-thought and optimized.
RelativeLayers unifies web design and takes it a step further by introducing features such as error handling, browser detection, real-time moving / resizing / clipping, relative positioning and dimensioning, external page embedding, a revised event model, automatic limit enforcement, drag & drop and a lot more.
Personally I've switched all my projects to Subversion. It's simply the easiest to use and most versalite SCM software that I've ever used. The price is also great since as long as you participate in open logging you don't have to pay.
Before I was using AccuRev and besides the fact that it's not distributed it's a marvel (http://www.accurev.com). The gui tools are excellent and the support team is very helpful.
There is one that's supporting 2.4 since the test versions ... RockLinux (http://www.rocklinux.org) the development snapshots already support 2.4 final. Glad to find out it existed since I like customizing my distribution a lot and RockLinux makes this very easy.
Strangely enough I have the impression that servlets are actually faster than perl when using IBM's jdk.