Do Ruby on Rails Developers Need Merb? | Hacker News Reader

Do Ruby on Rails Developers Need Merb?

internetnews.com

9 pointsraju12 comments

Rails was created to make web applications like Basecamp. I think Seaside was probably a better choice for web applications.

Now that client side frameworks like Cappucino and SproutCore exist, I don't really see the point in using Rails or Seaside.

I would recommend Merb as a replacement for dynamic, content-driven sites that people currently use PHP for.

Now that client side frameworks like Cappucino and SproutCore exist, I don't really see the point in using Rails or Seaside.

Why would a javascript client framework remove the need for a backend?

Because most of the work for Seaside (and to a similar extent Rails) is in managing user interface state. That goes away with client side frameworks. At least most of the messy complex stuff - obviously persistence things are still kinda handy ;)

Its back to the future.

When you have worked with both you find that the back end stuff just gets in the way for the rich client frameworks. Its not to say that "classic" action/restful style web apps don't have a place (they have a BIG place, especially for content heavy sites) but its not a one size fits all.

You still need a backend, just not a complicated framework. The backend for my Cappuccino application does not have to manage any UI state. It just reads and writes to a db.

Rails is perfect for building that.. that's what we're using it for on my current start-up.

>Now that client side frameworks like Cappucino and SproutCore exist, I don't really see the point in using Rails or Seaside.

Couldn't agree more. Impressed daily with Cappuccino.

Yeah. The irony is that server-side frameworks really started to get good just before most of their functionality migrated back to the client.

Merb has grown so large, I think at this point Sinatra is better for very small projects. Use Merb if you want something like Rails, but with better internals and more flexibility of companion technologies.

I see Merb as being like Postgres and Rails like MySQL. Both are good products. Merb is better put together from a technical perspective, but doesn't have the mindshare that Rails has. This means less plugins being created, and less search results on Google for your error messages. For advanced programmers this usually doesn't matter, but for beginners it makes Merb much less accessible.

>Do Ruby on Rails Developers Need Merb?

Yes.

For small sites, Rails is the ultimate in readable and simple frameworks.

However. For very small sites where the whole application is placed in one source file. For bigger sites where not all the controllers is placed in one directory. For sites which uses jQuery instead of prototype. For sites where thread-safety is important, the answer is Merb.

Sounds like Scheme and Common Lisp all over again. Every popular framework eventually gets complicated and tempts us to do a "clean slate" rewrite.

Rails succeeded because it's opinionated. I don't want to choose from five different ORM layers. I want one that works.

And Merb gives you that, with the basic Merb stack. And then when you change your mind later, that's cool too.

Merb is not at all positioned to make you pick, it simply allows you to choose.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com