I've been working with rails for a while now. Rails is the second web framework I've tried. It blows the doors off catalyst (perl's best framework). I even just wrote my first plugin (broomstick). Ruby's ability to meta-program blew me away with it's ease of use. I've been so impressed with the helpers that rails uses to make a lot of tasks ridiculously easy, but of course rails isn't perfect. That brings me to my question. What's in your wishlist for rails? My biggest wish is a queue system for rjs. Synchronous rjs call would be great! I'm really curious what everyone else is waiting to see! Charlie B. www.recentrambles.com
on 2006-04-28 21:34
on 2006-04-29 00:44
Second best? Joe
on 2006-04-29 00:58
The second he's tried, not second best.
on 2006-04-29 01:06
Updated documentation that includes sample code, not just source code.
on 2006-04-29 02:26
I completely agree with better documentation and sample code, especially coming from what PHP has to offer in that regards. Though I am just beginning. Thomas S. wrote: > Updated documentation that includes sample code, not just source code.
on 2006-04-29 03:12
On 4/28/06, Marston A. <email@example.com> wrote: > I completely agree with better documentation and sample code, Agile Web D. with Rails 2nd Edition > especially coming from what PHP has to offer in that regards. I agree completely. The PHP docs with the user comments are much better than what Ruby and Rails have.
on 2006-04-29 03:15
On 4/28/06, Charlie B. <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > My biggest wish is a queue system for rjs. Synchronous rjs call would be > great! > What do you mean by this? Thanks, Peter
on 2006-04-29 04:58
Hi, I would like to see the following on the wishlist: o better documentation with code snippets o better deployment mechanism for rails application... Mongrel??? Note: It took me 20 minutes or so to build an application but I took me 3 times as look to deploy it. -Conrad
on 2006-04-29 05:44
On 4/28/06, Conrad T. <email@example.com> wrote: > Hi, I would like to see the following on the wishlist: > > o better documentation with code snippets > > o better deployment mechanism for rails application... Mongrel??? Deploying with mongrel is pretty easy: $ sudo mongrel_rails start -p 80 -d -e production (from memory)
on 2006-04-29 06:30
Joe Van D. wrote: > On 4/28/06, Conrad T. <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> Hi, I would like to see the following on the wishlist: >> >> o better documentation with code snippets >> >> o better deployment mechanism for rails application... Mongrel??? > > Deploying with mongrel is pretty easy: > $ sudo mongrel_rails start -p 80 -d -e production > (from memory) More options (or more easier options) to deploy rails apps on Windows for production. (I run Windows, so you will have to speak slowly.) Particularly if you have existing Apache PHP installs. Oh, for added complexity I develop on a mac. I have Apache, MySQL and PHP running smoothly and consistently on both Windows and OS X. Ruby and Rails are installed. So I don't know what path to take... replace apache with Lighttpd, then get all my PHP stuff to work again (with a whole new config file to deal with) or pass through Apache to mongrel. Call me lame but I would love a Windows Mongrel installer ("point to your existing Apache (or Lighttpd) install, now point to your rails app directory") etc. And a little control panel to show me Mongrel's status, logs and graceful restart, shut down or start would be groovy as well. I know none of these are on anyone's priority list... ans maybe it is too early for this (took Apache for windows a while to offer this kind of hand holding).
on 2006-05-03 20:57
Hi Joe, thanks for your post because I wasn't sure if there was a better mechanism. I'll check with TextDrive.com to see if this is an option for me. I'm looking for an easier deployment option(s) onto Unix hosts. -Conrad
on 2006-05-03 20:58
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 01:32:08PM -0400, Charlie B. wrote: > What's in your wishlist for rails? I'm relatively new to Rails. My Rails wish list is pretty small, mainly because almost every time I think of something I need I find that it's either already included in Rails or available as a plugin/generator/engine. So, here are a few items I'd wish for: 1. Ensure that new versions of Rails don't break older Rails applications. Since I'm still working on my first Rails app I haven't had a problem with this myself. But, I've seen enough posts about problems when upgrading to newer versions of Rails to know it's a problem for many people. 2. Remove **ALL** frames from api.RubyOnRails.org, add a search function, and generate a PDF version for those who prefer printed documentation. Well, I was trying for a few items but could only think of a couple. Rails makes things so easy it's tuff to think of things it needs. Kevin http://www.RawFedDogs.net http://www.WacoAgilityGroup.org Bruceville, TX
on 2006-05-03 20:58
On 4/28/06, Charlie B. <email@example.com> wrote: > > What's in your wishlist for rails? > I'd love to see support for constraints in migrations, as well as better handling of the numeric/decimal data type. -Isak
on 2006-05-03 20:58
You know, these are both pretty good suggestions. #1 I think has become a priority for the core team, and #2 would be a pretty worthwhile side project. If I had more time I might do it myself -- just download the API docs and feed them to PDF::Writer and Bob's your uncle. -- Giles B. http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
on 2006-05-03 20:58
Wish list: 1. validates_presence_of that actually works for bools (false and true allowed for input, nil not allowed) 2. simple constraints specified in my migration pass through to a generated model 3. more constraints for db in migrations (actually, not sure if this would be a curse or a blessing)
on 2006-05-03 20:58
On May 1, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Giles B. wrote: >> people. Freeze your application on the current gems... I'm more in favor of having Rails 2.0 be (even better) than being stuck with the options I had with Rails 3 months ago. :-) Robby Robby R. Founder & Executive Director PLANET ARGON, LLC Ruby on Rails Development, Consulting & Hosting www.planetargon.com www.robbyonrails.com +1 503 445 2457 +1 877 55 ARGON [toll free] +1 815 642 4968 [fax]
on 2006-05-03 21:08
Currently, if you have a 50 line rjs file, each line is sent to the browser and executed as soon as the file is read. If you want each line to wait until the previous line is finished you have to program in delays. If there was a queue system you wouldn't have to do this. Charlie bowman www.recentrambles.com
on 2006-05-03 21:08
Fixing or replacing rdoc documentation on rails. No good searching provided. Spotty coverage. Terrible screen layout, everything is truncated on the right or left. Ugly colors. Sometimes you have to know the name of the thing you're looking for. Lousy index. I am immensely grateful for rdoc's existence but cannot help but start grumbling when I use it, whether for rails or anything else. Mixing api docs with source code means the documentation writers need write access to the source code. Not every organization will want this. Maybe the rails developers do. Warren S.
on 2006-08-03 15:31
This post contains information on Queue's in rjs calls. http://www.railsdevelopment.com/2006/01/15/effectqueue/ Hope it's what you're after.
on 2006-08-03 15:54
Bind variables for Oracle and others init and down methods for controllers (from Java servlets). Rails is very beautifull.
on 2006-08-03 16:22
Actually that post is not what I was talking about. Yes there are visual effects queues, but not all rjs is visual effects. The queue system you referenced is only available to visual effects. Charlie B. www.recentrambles.com
on 2006-08-03 16:22
My Rails wishlist: I wish I'd written it. I wish I didn't have to go to work today at my stupid Java job. -- Giles B. http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
on 2006-08-03 16:22
I used to be proud to work with perl all day and not have to deal with "real" languages. Now perl bores me to no end!
on 2006-08-03 16:22
I used to be a Perl guy, it's actually a very powerful language, but it became "the" CGI scripting language, and consequently picked up a very bad reputation, as almost every bad piece of code from about 1996 to 2001 was written in Perl. I heard Glenn Vanderburg in a podcast say "You can do practically anything with Perl except read it." ^_^ -- Giles B. http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
on 2008-02-14 01:50
> Wish list: > > 1. validates_presence_of that actually works for bools (false and true > allowed for input, nil not allowed) Amen. Another wish would be the function ar_instance.save_guaranteeing_these_arent_blank(:name, :phone) (or does it exist) quick hack: class ActiveRecord::Base def save_unless_missing *args self.errors.clear passed = true for arg in args val = self[arg] unless val and val != '' self.errors.add arg, " cannot be blank" passed = false end end # could add a call to validate in here return nil unless passed return save end end Except that it actually worked with the validates_x_of or what not. Cheers. -Roger
on 2008-02-14 02:00
On Feb 13, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Roger P. wrote: > (or does it exist) You might find some of the custom validators I wrote tobe useful. They've also been modified to allow many of the appropriate UTF-8 characters. (download link is at the bottom of the article) http://www.railsdev.ws/blog/11/custom-validations-in-rails/ Stupid WordPress recently smashed all line endings, so the code views are mangled a bit. :-( -- def gw writes_at 'www.railsdev.ws' end
on 2008-02-14 02:06
> Stupid WordPress recently smashed all line endings, so the code views > are mangled a bit. :-( Ugh I hate it when wordpress does that--especially when you modify an existing comment. Boo! Thanks! -Roger
on 2008-02-14 04:24
My major wishes for rails are three big points: 1) A really simple, fast deployment option, although I am doing alright with capistrano + nginx + mongrel cluster, I just think a very simple system would be awesome. Although Heroku and Switchpipe are both shaping up as options on that front. 2) Better documentation. I am disappointed that as a community we really do a poor job of online documentation. My favorite that I have found by far is: http://www.railsbrain.com/api/rails-2.0.2/doc/index.html I love it and it is quite good as far as interface and searching is concerned. I just wish as a community we did a better job of having every method properly documented with a quick summary, all possible input values, the output, side-effects and samples. I admit books such as "Rails Way" and "AWDR" do a good job though of filling this gap. 3) Speed and Concurrent Requests. I am very interested in Thin as far as basic speed boosts go but there is a lot of cruft in rails that slows it down. Just simple garbage collection fixes recently revealed can speed up rails significantly. As a community, we need to do a better job of reviewing and refactoring old code and speeding it up. Specifically in terms of the routing system, the garbage collection, active record queries, etc. I also wanted to mention the hope of having a multi-threaded ActiveRecord one day which would allow concurrent requests similar to the work being done with Merb. I would like to mention that Merb is a very interesting budding alternative. Merb + Datamapper could shape up as a viable rails alternative within the next couple years.
on 2008-02-14 08:05
Just better API docs. Rdoc doesn't do it. In fact, it blurs the line between internal Rails code and things you are supposed to use. There are 4 places in Rails I like to put api calls: Model, View, Controller and Console. Given an arbitrary helper, say, I'd like to know whether I have access to call it in those 4 places. From the documentation. F
on 2008-02-15 02:14
> 3) Speed and Concurrent Requests. I am very interested in Thin as far as > basic speed boosts go but there is a lot of cruft in rails that slows it > down. Just simple garbage collection fixes recently revealed can speed > up rails significantly. which are you referring to? Yeah my wish would be rails that could just 'meld' with 1.9 to be super fast. And fast startup time so that if you use cgi you're ok (then the deployment problem is...less). Ideally for deployment I guess would be mod_rails that loads 'rails' itself then for each request it forks, goes and reads the app's configs, and processes the file (and this is fast). Ahhh. wishing is always so easy :) Thoughts? -R
on 2008-02-15 02:54
Charlie B. wrote: > What's in your wishlist for rails? 1) Thread safety in ActionPack 2) Thread pooling in ActiveRecord 3) Smaller memory footprint 4) Saner Ruby GC that takes copy-on-write into account (would help a lot with 3))
on 2008-02-15 03:03
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Jeremy E. <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > Charlie B. wrote: > > What's in your wishlist for rails? > > 1) Thread safety in ActionPack > 2) Thread pooling in ActiveRecord These are 'magic beans' features whose importance deserve to be thoroughly deflated. > 3) Smaller memory footprint > 4) Saner Ruby GC that takes copy-on-write into account (would help a lot > with 3)) These are extremely valuable. Some folks have been making great strides here in the past 6 months. Hongli L. has modified Ruby GC to be CoW-friendly and Matz has expressed interest in merging with Ruby 1.9: http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/category/op... The Acunote crew have been doing extensive memory profiling and their patches are going straight to Rails trunk: http://blog.pluron.com/2008/02/memory-profilin.html Best, jeremy
on 2008-02-15 03:12
>> 3) Smaller memory footprint >> 4) Saner Ruby GC that takes copy-on-write into account (would help a lot >> with 3)) > > These are extremely valuable. Some folks have been making great > strides here in the past 6 months. > > Hongli L. has modified Ruby GC to be CoW-friendly and Matz has > expressed interest in merging with Ruby 1.9: > http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/category/op... Wow the new code for the GC looks a lot nicer than the old. Note however that it still reads all allocated memory (I believe) -- just doesn't write to all of it anymore per sweep. Also note that it still uses mark and sweep so this may not be the optimal solution yet. More like a patch of the working one with mostly similar characteristics, and some speed up. Looks nicer than it used to be. -Roger
on 2008-02-15 20:30
Based on 2 years of Rails experience, as of next month, here's my wish list: 1) Comprehensive deprecation and _removal_ information - something better than http://www.rubyonrails.org/deprecation. Ideally, a utility that would scan your project and report on what would need to change to move it to newer Rails version X. Is API call deprecated in version X? Is API call _gone_ in version X? 2) api.rubyonrails.org documentation that includes the version of Rails at which an API call was introduced and whether it's been deprecated or not (for Java people, something akin to @since and @Deprecated Javadoc tags) 3) Support for prepared statements in ActiveRecord 4) Support for DB connection pooling in (a layer above, perhaps) ActiveRecord Wes
on 2008-02-18 06:29
Jeremy K. wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Jeremy E. > <email@example.com> wrote: >> Charlie B. wrote: >> > What's in your wishlist for rails? >> >> 1) Thread safety in ActionPack >> 2) Thread pooling in ActiveRecord > > These are 'magic beans' features whose importance deserve to be > thoroughly deflated. I disagree. Thread safety in ActionPack would allow you to use fewer processes in production, which would help memory usage. I'm not saying it is very important, but that doesn't mean it doesn't belong on a wishlist. A bigger isssue is the lack of connection/thread pooling in ActiveRecord, which makes it pretty unusable for web frameworks such as Ramaze. With allow_concurrency = false, if two requests need access to the database at the same time, one fails, as there is no thread safety. If you set allow_concurrency = true, every request gets its own connection, but garbage collection doesn't kick in and you eventually run out of resources (that could be a problem with the database adapter and or Ramaze leaving references to the thread open, though). These features are obviously important to the people designing alternative ruby web frameworks such as Ramaze and Merb and ORMs such as Sequel and DataMapper. Obviously it is easier to ignore thread safety, but do you believe that ActionPack would be worse off if it were thread safe, or that ActiveRecord would be worse off if it supported connection pooling? >> 3) Smaller memory footprint >> 4) Saner Ruby GC that takes copy-on-write into account (would help a lot >> with 3)) > > These are extremely valuable. Some folks have been making great > strides here in the past 6 months. > > Hongli L. has modified Ruby GC to be CoW-friendly and Matz has > expressed interest in merging with Ruby 1.9: > http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/category/op... I've read about this work, but I did not know that Matz was interested. I certainly hope it gets applied. > The Acunote crew have been doing extensive memory profiling and their > patches are going straight to Rails trunk: > http://blog.pluron.com/2008/02/memory-profilin.html That's good to know. Thanks, Jeremy
on 2008-02-18 08:50
Roger P. wrote: > Another wish would be the function > ar_instance.save_guaranteeing_these_arent_blank(:name, :phone) > (or does it exist) > For that last one, validates_presence_of does it.