Hi Folks, I'm a veteran ASP.net programmer of 3 years, just got my MCTS for ASP.net 2.0 I would really appreciate if anyone could give me some thoughtful comments on wether I should learn RoR (knowing nothing about it at all except looking as some astonishing screencasts) Could you also point me to links and book recommendations? I'd really appreciate a breakdown of why this is so worth learning. Regards and Many Thanks in advance MM
on 2007-01-19 15:13
on 2007-01-19 15:28
MM -- I am in a similar boat as these guys, coming from a Microsoft background and I can't recommend their site enough. http://softiesonrails.com/ Regards, Ed C.
on 2007-01-19 15:31
On 1/19/07, MereMortal <email@example.com> wrote: > > I'd really appreciate a breakdown of why this is so worth learning. Reason number one: because it will make you a better ASP.Net programmer. Or more generally, it will make you a better programmer and makes you more marketable. Learning something like Ruby and Rails provides you with a different perspective on how to solve problems and how to program. This knowledge is not limited to being used just with Rails, it can be applied to problems being solved in ASP.Net. One good video that I would recommend is Chad Fowler's, Don't Follow the Lemmings. In terms of books, check out either THE book - Agile Web Development with Rails, or Burce Tate's Ruby on Rails Up and Running. The later book is shorter, but still gives a good overall view of Rails.  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8984753198261505541 Chris -- www.fuzzylizard.com You know you've achieved perfection in design, Not when you have nothing more to add, But when you have nothing more to take away. â€” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
on 2007-01-19 15:36
Thanks Ed C. and thanks Chris Ed C. I loved the pics on the website (softies) where the guy ditches his huge collection of Windows Books (which I also have) for a small collection of Rails books. Chris many thx for the thoughtful advice... I'm writing here from london and I wonder if either of you know if there is a thriving need for Rails in the commercial sector. Is rails viable for fully blown commercial work or is it some purist's dream?
on 2007-01-19 16:00
another question: is it also the case that in Ruby, you just design the relational tables in an RDBMS (say like MySQL0 and Ruby turns them automatically into an object hierarchy? is that all you have to do? Regards and thanks MM
on 2007-01-19 16:04
On 1/19/07, MereMortal <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > another question: > is it also the case that in Ruby, you just design the relational tables > in an RDBMS (say like MySQL0 and Ruby turns them automatically into an > object hierarchy? is that all you have to do? > yes, if you use a plugin such as DRYSQL. If you don't you'll need to specify has_many and co relation stuff in your models.
on 2007-01-19 16:15
thx, but as I understand it, (I didn't know about the plug in or not), it's the case isn't it that because of he way that Rails is constructed, you don't have to write tons of middleware that interfaces with your database schema as once you design the schema you work with it transparently. I ask this because the amount of code needed in ASP.net to create a business layer (BLL) and a data layer is staggering, this is quite apart from the stored procedures etc... so once the Relational tables are created, you do a couple of swishy commands and you're read to see your pages, no?
on 2007-01-19 16:27
Patrick Aljord wrote: > MereMortal wrote: > > > > another question: > > is it also the case that in Ruby, you just design the relational tables > > in an RDBMS (say like MySQL0 and Ruby turns them automatically into an > > object hierarchy? is that all you have to do? > > > yes, if you use a plugin such as DRYSQL. If you don't you'll need to > specify has_many and co relation stuff in your models. You answered the high-level question. The low-level question is this. If you have a database with a table in it call People, and its primary key is called 'id', and you have a config/database.yml file pointing to it, then this is all the Ruby you must write to access a record in the table class Person < ActiveRecord::Base end That gives you several million convenience functions to access any Person by any attribute, and upgrade & write that Person back. p = Person.find(42) p.name = "Forsythe" p.save! The system reads the People schema and builds all the elements of the Person object automatically. Oh, and it also changes the number of the nouns, where appropriate. Next, you might want to "refactor" your database. That's typically hard, because customer data must survive upgrades. Rails provides a complete "migration" system to let you express database changes as high-level commands, such as rename_column or add_column. Next, if you have relations in your database, you can match them with Rails relations: class Person < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :pets end That pulls in another table, Pets, and matches the person_id in each pet with the id of each Person. That provides lines like... dogs = person.pets.find_by_species('dog') Patrick answered the question "why doesn't the schema reader also read the relations and automatically set all the has_many and such directives correctly". Default Rails doesn't do that because you typically want a minor subset of all the relations. -- Phlip http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!
on 2007-01-19 16:41
many thx to all! Regards MM