ruby on rails ... python on ?

[Steve Holden]

Re: OT: Ruby programmers use Python

Alex Martelli wrote:
[color=blue]
> A.M. Kuchling <amk@amk.ca> wrote:
> ...
>[color=green]
>>can just write plain vanilla HTML, being sure to put DIV elements and ID
>>attributes in the right places, and then style the pages with CSS. Quixote
>>is betting that pure HTML + CSS is the way of the future.[/color]
>
>
> Sounds like a pretty safe bet to me, in general terms. I'm not quite
> sure how fully a 'plain vanilla HTML' page can be controlled,
> looks-wise, with CSS only, but no doubt as generations of CSS succeed
> each other the trend is up (though I don't think it's asymptotically
> going to 100%, but that's a different issue;-).
>
>
> Alex[/color]

If you take a look at the Zen garden (http://csszengarden.com/) you will
realize that Quixote's bet is probably a good one. I was pleasantly
surprised how the recent re-work of www.holdenweb.com made the
programming for the site (it's static HTML produced from a database)
much less dependent on look-and-feel issues thanks to input from a good
designer.

regards
Steve
--

http://www.holdenweb.com

http://pydish.holdenweb.com

Holden Web LLC +1 800 494 3119

[Istvan Albert]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

flab ba wrote:
[color=blue]
> /also/ familiar with Rails - and if they could recommend something in the
> Python world that is comparable.[/color]

yeah, zope.

It is so good it does not even look like python on the
surface ... one of the biggest mistakes in developing
web-frameworks is over-emphasizing the underlying
programming language.

A good web-framework should not look like
Ruby or Python, that is not what these languages were
designed for.

Of course the framework should allow easy access to
any class or module written in these languages, but
in the end the most important things are the services
that promote collaboration, allow a finely grained access
control by various means, create a self contained solutions
that can be easily deployed replicated or backed up.
Web frameworks must do the hardest thing of all,
support radically changing requirements.

These overly "programmat ic" frameworks revolve around a single
person's ability to understand all aspects of the website,
and crash and burn when that person is not around anymore.

Istvan.

[Ian Bicking]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

flab ba wrote:[color=blue]
> The pragmatic programmers (Dave & Andy) are spreading a good word about
> RubyOnRails. I was wondering if there are any Python programmers who are
> /also/ familiar with Rails - and if they could recommend something in the
> Python world that is comparable.[/color]

I've looked a little at Rails. It's not super special. Well, it *is*
compared to things like Java; dynamic languages *are* quite superior for
rapid development of websites, and Ruby and Python are similar languages
in that way.

Rails is really a whole stack that works well together. People have
been writing this sort of thing in Python for a long time; which isn't
to say they always have gotten it right, or that those efforts have had
the right perspective to be strategic successes (i.e., become popular).

Lessee... Rails seems to have:

* A simple object publisher. There's a ton of these in Python. It also
perhaps includes some sort of MVC system, where the object picks up a
template automatically if it exists. These exist as well, though I
think MVC efforts can become overly ambitious or overly restrictive
fairly easily.

* An object-relational mapper. I'd say this is close to SQLObject,
though SQLObject is in some ways more powerful.

* A templating system. Looks like ASP. There's lots of templating
languages in Python; the simplest (e.g., embed Python code) can be
problematic because of Python's significant whitespace. But anyway, we
have lots and lots of these, and there are real reasons for why there's
multiple templating languages. Spyce is probably the closest to Rails.


All three of these pieces fit together really well in Rails, which is
perhaps what it offers that Python doesn't have. Well, I'm sure some
framework out there has this, but it's hard to say, there's so damn many.

But, while this is really compelling when you show off the creation of a
simple system, I suspect it becomes a fair amount more complicated later
on. At least, that is my experience with Python projects of similar
ambition. It's neat to setup a database and have it work instantly,
complete with the standard CRUD forms. But this only works for "leaf"
tables, and even then no so well. How do you deal with joins? How do
you deal with complex requirements on input, or actions on updates?
Eventually you'll need to tweak a generated form just a *little*, does
that mean you have to throw away all the automated aspects and code it
by hand?

I don't mean to criticize Rails with these questions; it's not that
Python frameworks solve these wonderfully either, these are just hard
problems. But for realistic web applications these are inevitable
issues, and I suspect Rails isn't quite as compelling when you take them
into account.

OTOH, I'd love to see something in Python that is just as tight as
Rails, but uses all the pieces we've already developed. It's really
just a question of sticking pieces together; but that's a surprisingly
difficult operation.

--
Ian Bicking / ianb@colorstudy .com / http://blog.ianbicking.org

[John]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

> yeah, zope.[color=blue]
>
> It is so good it does not even look like python on the
> surface ... one of the biggest mistakes in developing
> web-frameworks is over-emphasizing the underlying
> programming language.
>
> A good web-framework should not look like
> Ruby or Python, that is not what these languages were
> designed for.[/color]

Why do you say that? I could agree if Zope could be programmed in many
languages. Then not tending to any language would be a benefit. On the
contrary, I see things like ZODB making things that are not Pythonic,
look Pythonic and that is considered a good feature.

A Python only framework not feeling like Python was a deterrent for me
to learn Zope well.

[Martin Maney]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

Ian Bicking <ianb@colorstud y.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> OTOH, I'd love to see something in Python that is just as tight as
> Rails, but uses all the pieces we've already developed. It's really
> just a question of sticking pieces together; but that's a surprisingly
> difficult operation.[/color]

I don't know why that would be surprising. Integration has *always*
been one of the hardest parts of putting a large system together, so
when the parts weren't designed to fit each other in the forst place...

--
One Zone to rule them all, One Zone to find them,
One Zone to name them all and in the domain bind them,
In the Land of DotCom where the Spammers lie.

[Peter Hansen]

Re: OT: Ruby programmers use Python (was Re: ruby on rails ... pythonon ?)

Richard Blackwood wrote:[color=blue]
> <SNIP>[color=green]
>> To the OP: there are several Python "applicatio n frameworks"
>> which on the surface appear to be similar in goal to Rails.
>> I don't know much about them, and at the moment even their
>> names aren't coming to me, so I can't help more than that.
>> I think a search for "enterprise application framework Python"
>> would probably turn up at least one of them.[/color]
>
> Do you mean Zope?[/color]

Yikes! I *didn't* mean Zope, as it doesn't qualify for the
term 'enterprise application framework' as I used it above,
but I *should* have meant Zope, because upon revisiting the
rubyonrails.org site, I see that it is a *web* framework.

No idea how I missed that key word. Perhaps the MVC part
grabbed my eyes and filtered the rest of my reading (which
was admittedly brief). Perhaps I was just on drugs. Was
that a Saturday? Yes, it was definitely the drugs. Today
I'm on *different* drugs, the pretty blue ones, and I'm
feeling much furrier, thank you. Down, Shadowfax, down!
Oh, the spiders are crawling up my legs! They're coming
to take me away, away! to the funny farm, where life is

[Jeff Blaine]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

> I've looked a little at Rails. It's not super special. Well, it *is*[color=blue]
> compared to things like Java; dynamic languages *are* quite superior for
> rapid development of websites, and Ruby and Python are similar languages
> in that way.
>
> Rails is really a whole stack that works well together. People have
> been writing this sort of thing in Python for a long time; which isn't
> to say they always have gotten it right, or that those efforts have had
> the right perspective to be strategic successes (i.e., become popular).[/color]

I'd have to politely disagree that it's not super special. It
exists, in usable form, today, and works incredibly well and
incredibly cleanly. That's pretty super special, IMO :)

Talk is cheap!
[color=blue]
> All three of these pieces fit together really well in Rails, which is
> perhaps what it offers that Python doesn't have. Well, I'm sure some
> framework out there has this, but it's hard to say, there's so damn many.[/color]

I'm not at all sure.
[color=blue]
> But, while this is really compelling when you show off the creation of a
> simple system, I suspect it becomes a fair amount more complicated later
> on. At least, that is my experience with Python projects of similar
> ambition. It's neat to setup a database and have it work instantly,
> complete with the standard CRUD forms. But this only works for "leaf"
> tables, and even then no so well. How do you deal with joins? How do
> you deal with complex requirements on input, or actions on updates?
> Eventually you'll need to tweak a generated form just a *little*, does
> that mean you have to throw away all the automated aspects and code it
> by hand?[/color]

I recommend watching the "2 hour" video at http://www.rubyonrails.org
(watch the last half)
[color=blue]
> I don't mean to criticize Rails with these questions; it's not that
> Python frameworks solve these wonderfully either, these are just hard
> problems. But for realistic web applications these are inevitable
> issues, and I suspect Rails isn't quite as compelling when you take them
> into account.
>
> OTOH, I'd love to see something in Python that is just as tight as
> Rails[/color]

Hell yes :)

Thanks for the objective and thoughtful post!

jblaine,
6yr-Python-fanatic-feeling-the-ruby-pull

[Dave Brueck]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

Jeff Blaine wrote:[color=blue]
> 6yr-Python-fanatic-feeling-the-ruby-pull[/color]

Like I said before - if you're feeling the Ruby pull, go for it. I tried Ruby
and rather strongly disliked it. If, instead, you're feeling the Rails pull (you
feel the ideas behind Rails have merit), then why not just port it to Python?

-Dave

[Alan Kennedy]

Re: ruby on rails ... python on ?

[Jeff Blaine][color=blue][color=green]
>> 6yr-Python-fanatic-feeling-the-ruby-pull[/color][/color]

[Dave Brueck][color=blue]
> Like I said before - if you're feeling the Ruby pull, go for it. I tried
> Ruby and rather strongly disliked it. If, instead, you're feeling the
> Rails pull (you feel the ideas behind Rails have merit), then why not
> just port it to Python?[/color]

Or talk to someone who has already started. Peter Hunt declared to the
web-sig recently that he's interested in developing a python-on-rails,
which would also be WSGI compatible.

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/2004-November/001042.html

Peter obviously hopes to capitalize on the portability of WSGI
middleware components.

regards,

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