Django Vs Rails

[flamesrock]

Firstly, this topic is NOT intended for trolling or starting any flame
wars.

I want to know if anyone has experience with these frameworks, and if
so, how do they compare? Which one do you prefer?

Going back to school in a few days, I simply don't have the time to try
both.

-thanks

http://djangoproject.com

http://rubyonrails.com

[D H]

Re: Django Vs Rails

flamesrock wrote:[color=blue]
> Firstly, this topic is NOT intended for trolling or starting any flame
> wars.[/color]

Whatever you say, "flamesrock ".

[gene tani]

Re: Django Vs Rails

http://griddlenoise.blogspot.com/2005/07/python-off-rails.html

http://www.boddie.org.uk/python/web_frameworks.html

flamesrock wrote:[color=blue]
> Firstly, this topic is NOT intended for trolling or starting any flame
> wars.
>[/color]

[flamesrock]

Re: Django Vs Rails

Thanks for the links, gene tani.

D H,
'flamesrock' refers to the Calgary Flames, not the act of flaming.

[Diez B. Roggisch]

Re: Django Vs Rails

gene tani wrote:[color=blue]
> http://griddlenoise.blogspot.com/200...off-rails.html[/color]

I don't think that opinion is very founded - especially what he thinks
metaprogramming is about, and what not.

What he seems not to grasp is the crucial difference between django and
rails/subway (at least in the way the yare _used_ by his examples):

- rails/subway reflect over a existing table. They create OR-mappings
based on that. You only specify exceptional attributes for these mappings.

- django specifies the whole meta-model in python - and _generates_
the SQL/DDL to populate the DB. So obviously you have to be more verbose
- otherwiese you won't have the fields you need.


I personally prefer the latter approach - I want my tables modeled after
my objects, not the other way round. I tried to find out if subway and
rails can do the same - that is, generate the sql. For subway the lack
of documentation prevented that, and I didn't find it in rails , too.

And there is at least one shortcoming to the first approach, when using
the most popular RDBMS, MySQL: The lack of foreign key constraints makes
me wonder how to automatically infer 1:n or m:n relationships. From a
rails tutorial, I see that one has to declare these too:

http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/01/20/rails.html?page=5

But maybe someone who has expirience with subway or rails can elaborate
on this?

Diez

[gene tani]

Re: Django Vs Rails

Here's another, (i'm just flipping thru del.icio.us and furl tags, not
endorsing any viewpoints. I've never looked at Django or Subway, but I
do need to look at zope 3, i think):

http://www.magpiebrain.com/archives/2005/08/14/rails_and_django

Diez B. Roggisch wrote:[color=blue]
> gene tani wrote:[color=green]
> > http://griddlenoise.blogspot.com/200...off-rails.html[/color]
>[/color]

[Jaroslaw Zabiello]

Re: Django Vs Rails

Dnia 5 Sep 2005 19:06:51 -0700, flamesrock napisa³(a):
[color=blue]
> Firstly, this topic is NOT intended for trolling or starting any flame
> wars.
>
> I want to know if anyone has experience with these frameworks, and if
> so, how do they compare? Which one do you prefer?[/color]

Django's ORM does not work with SQL Server (only Postgresql, MySQL and
SQlite). it would be problem to use Django for m$ based intranets. Rails
has more features, better docs and seems to be more mature than Django. And
last but not least, Django has no official release up today.

--
JZ

[D H]

Re: Django Vs Rails

flamesrock wrote:[color=blue]
> D H,
> 'flamesrock' refers to the Calgary Flames, not the act of flaming.
>[/color]

It was just a joke about your statement and your name. I thought it was
obvious enough that a smiley wasn't necessary. I don't care though,
flames happen on comp.lang.pytho n all the time.
Go with Rails. Django is only like a month old. Unless you are more
comfortable using python than ruby.

[bruno modulix]

Re: Django Vs Rails

D H wrote:

(snip)[color=blue]
> Go with Rails. Django is only like a month old.[/color]

Please take time to read the project's page. Django has in fact three
years of existence and is already used on production websites, so it's
far from pre-alpha/planning stage.

--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in 'onurb@xiludom. gro'.split('@')])"

[Alan Kennedy]

Re: Django Vs Rails

[D H][color=blue][color=green]
>>Go with Rails. Django is only like a month old.[/color][/color]

[bruno modulix][color=blue]
> Please take time to read the project's page. Django has in fact three
> years of existence and is already used on production websites, so it's
> far from pre-alpha/planning stage.[/color]

But the APIs still aren't 100% stable.

http://www.djangoproject.com/screencasts/model_syntax_change/

--
alan kennedy
------------------------------------------------------
email alan: http://xhaus.com/contact/alan

[D H]

Re: Django Vs Rails

bruno modulix wrote:[color=blue]
> D H wrote:
>
> (snip)
>[color=green]
>>Go with Rails. Django is only like a month old.[/color]
>
>
> Please take time to read the project's page. Django has in fact three
> years of existence and is already used on production websites, so it's
> far from pre-alpha/planning stage.
>[/color]

Don't make any assumptions about what I have and haven't read. Django
was only publicly released in mid-July. Less than two months ago.
I never implied it was "pre-alpha" or in a "planning" stage.
The Ruby framework is also more mature and much much more tested than
Django. But even then I am not stating one is inherently better than
the other. Both seem very well designed. But if you have no clue about
either project like the original poster, then I'd recommend Rails,
unless you are already comfortable with Python (and not used to Ruby),
which case go with Django.

[bruno modulix]

Re: Django Vs Rails

D H wrote:[color=blue]
> bruno modulix wrote:
>[color=green]
>> D H wrote:
>>
>> (snip)
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Go with Rails. Django is only like a month old.[/color]
>>
>>
>> Please take time to read the project's page. Django has in fact three
>> years of existence and is already used on production websites, so it's
>> far from pre-alpha/planning stage.
>>[/color]
>
> Don't make any assumptions about what I have and haven't read.[/color]

Don't make the assumption that the advice to read the project's page was
directed to you only !-)
[color=blue]
> Django
> was only publicly released in mid-July. Less than two months ago.
> I never implied it was "pre-alpha" or in a "planning" stage.[/color]

That what I understood from your post, and I guess most readers would
understand it that way.

Now the fact that Django, while being young as a publicly realeased
project, has in fact 3 years of existence *on production websites* is
IMHO worth mentioning, so peoples who haven't read the project's page
yet don't make the assumption that it must be too young to be usable in
production. The "take time to read..." advice was directed to these
people as well !-)

Regards
--
bruno desthuilliers
ruby -e "print 'onurb@xiludom. gro'.split('@') .collect{|p|
p.split('.').co llect{|w| w.reverse}.join ('.')}.join('@' )"

[gene tani]

Re: Django Vs Rails

just to make it really easy, there's some really good blogs and
detailed analyses of the frameworks, competition is good:

http://del.icio.us/tag/rails+django

gene tani wrote:[color=blue]
> Here's another, (i'm just flipping thru del.icio.us and furl tags, not[/color]

[Terry Reedy]

Re: Django Vs Rails


"bruno modulix" <onurb@xiludom. gro> wrote in message
news:431dca31$0 $29335$636a15ce @news.free.fr.. .[color=blue]
>D H wrote:
>
> (snip)[color=green]
>> Go with Rails. Django is only like a month old.[/color]
>
> Please take time to read the project's page. Django has in fact three
> years of existence and is already used on production websites, so it's
> far from pre-alpha/planning stage.[/color]

One can also check it out in action.
http://www.ljworld.com/ is the site it was developed for.

[Greg McIntyre]

Re: Django Vs Rails


Diez B. Roggisch wrote:[color=blue]
> I tried to find out if subway and
> rails can do the same - that is, generate the sql. For subway the lack
> of documentation prevented that, and I didn't find it in rails , too.[/color]

In Rails you can do that with the command:

$ rake db_structure_du mp

However I think it's not the prescribed way of using it because it
tends to involve losing all your data every time you make a schema
change. I think they recommend doing this once at the start of
development if you don't have a DB schema yet. Once you're up and
running, if you rely on ALTER TABLE type commands and manually update
your code to match the new schema, although it's more work it leaves
your data intact. I think that's the idea anyway.

[color=blue]
> And there is at least one shortcoming to the first approach, when using
> the most popular RDBMS, MySQL: The lack of foreign key constraints makes
> me wonder how to automatically infer 1:n or m:n relationships. From a
> rails tutorial, I see that one has to declare these too:
>
> http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2...ls.html?page=5
>
>
> But maybe someone who has expirience with subway or rails can elaborate
> on this?[/color]
[color=blue]
>From my experience with Rails, the OR mapping isn't hugely automated.[/color]
That is, some manual work is required if you change the schema, to
update the code that operates upon it. However although this is another
step it is pretty trivial due to the metaprogramming style methods.
Besides, if you're altering the schema you tend to have to update some
code anyway as you're most likely altering the functionality of the
system a little. And as I said above, a loose/manual OR mapping has its
benefits; I don't feel anxious about losing my data/schema when using
Rails because I know it leaves it alone.