[Seaside] Rails and Seaside

[stephane ducasse]

totally agree this is why this would be good to have a hacker version  
of Squeak for 3.9 :)


On 6 janv. 06, at 17:25, Jeremy Shute wrote:

> I think it's less about Seaside vs. Rails and more about Squeak vs.  
> Ruby.
> The paradigm shift from Python/Perl is greater in Squeak.  Verbose  
> message
> sends vs. dot-notation and function arity, lack of control structures,
> evaluation order control via blocks instead of special rules.   
> Images and
> changesets?  Where the hell are my files?
>
> The other trouble for me was one of incentive.  At first glance Squeak
> looked like a toy.  In fact, it comes with something called "Etoys"  
> and
> has "teacher packs" and all that educational, childish mumbo-jumbo.
> Squeak is often mentioned in the same breath as "Logo" and "turtle
> graphics".  Squeak reminds me of a Mazda Miata: killer sports car,  
> huge
> image problem.
>
> What I had to do was simple:
>
> * Eliminate the useless eyeball widget thing.
> * Eliminate everything else on the screen, including the trashcan.
> * Turn the background black instead of some silly shade of purple.
> * Save the image over the previous one.
>
> There, now I have a barren wasteland.  It's "Hackers and Painters":  
> when a
> painter picks up a canvas, typically it's a blank one.  For me,  
> when I'm
> learning how to use something, I need LESS distractions, not more.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
>> In hist post at
>> http://www.braithwaite-lee.com/weblog/2006/01/finding-signal-to- 
>> noise-ratio-in-never.html,
>> Reg Braithwaite has this to say about why Rails is chosen over
>> Seaside.  I am curious to hear others thoughts...
>>
>> Personally, I would choose Seaside over Rails any day of the week,  
>> and
>> twice on Sunday.  How do the other users of Seaside feel?  To me the
>> decision about choosing Seaside over Rails is not *just* about the
>> framework itself, it's also about the environment in which I am
>> building my application.  If Ruby came anywhere near Smalltalk's
>> environment, I might be more willing to lean toward Ruby.
>>
>> [quote]
>> Speaking of Rails, I'm going to conclude with my take on one reason
>> why Rails is taking off and Seaside is not. Rails allows programmers
>> to express the idioms they already know (relational databases,
>> web-backed MVC, stateless event handling plus a global session store)
>> in fewer bits.
>>
>> Seaside provides a whole new idiom, continuations, that IMO is more
>> powerful. I think you end up with an even higher signal-to-noise  
>> ratio
>> with a Seaside app than with a Rails app. Why? Because continuations
>> afford you a much higher degree of controller reuse.
>>
>> Now, here's the catch: if you try to imagine your current application
>> running on both Rails and on Seaside, you probably won't see much
>> difference between the two (although they'll both be an order of
>> magnitude better than ASP.NET). They will look the same because you
>> designed your application with idioms that both Rails and Seaside
>> support.
>>
>> To get a big win, you'd have to rethink your application's flow and
>> logic. You'd have to "think in Seaside." And you're not going to do
>> that. So you pick Rails, like so many others have picked it, because
>> it looks just like your ASP app, only all the noise has gone away.
>> It's all signal, baby.
>> [/quote]
>>
>> --
>> Jason Rogers
>>
>> "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I,
>> but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in
>> the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved
>> me, and gave himself for me."
>>     Galatians 2:20
>> _______________________________________________
>> Seaside mailing list
>> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
>>
>
>
> GPG PUBLIC KEY: 0xA2B36CE5
>
> _______________________________________________
> Seaside mailing list
> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
>