SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 46 of 46
  1. #26
    Beer drinker Srirangan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beerland!
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can't keep repeating the same point all over again. So for the last time..

    You are viewing PHP in the narrow prism of creating "dynamic websites". A Web Application framework is like taking just a limited subset of a capabilities languages capabilities and dressing them up nicely.

    If all you ever need is part of the tiny subset, then Frameworks are perfect for you. But that won't hold true for everyone.

    Cheers!
    Online Startups Insight for new entrepreneurs

  2. #27
    SitePoint Wizard samsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    5,011
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This kind of makes it sound like if you choose Rails, you throw away everything else Ruby might be able to do. This isn't so, the worst case scenario is that you don't get much of a (or any) productivity boost.

    It is a question of "which is most ideal?" rather than "which can do it?". They can pretty much all do it.

    Talking about "most ideal" in the scope of the typical web application, I'd frame the debate between various frameworks rather than various languages. My opinion is that for most web applications, the core libraries of any language are not ideal and developers can yield significant gains from using Symphony, TurboGears, Seaside, Rails, whatever.

    Sure, that doesn't mean that all web applications should be MVC or use a given framework, but we are talking about typical here. If we are going to frame a debate around an exception, we should go ahead and name a specific exception and maybe start a special thread around it.
    Using your unpaid time to add free content to SitePoint Pty Ltd's portfolio?

  3. #28
    Beer drinker Srirangan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beerland!
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This kind of makes it sound like if you choose Rails, you throw away everything else Ruby might be able to do.
    Hmm.. fair enough.
    Online Startups Insight for new entrepreneurs

  4. #29
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    986
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A Web Application framework is like taking just a limited subset of a capabilities languages capabilities and dressing them up nicely.
    No! It's extending the languages capabilities.

    If all you ever need is part of the tiny subset, then Frameworks are perfect for you. But that won't hold true for everyone.
    When comparing PHP to Rails, we're obviously talking about web applications. You wouldn't use Rails for desktop applications.

    Many people ask themselves this question: "Am I more productive with PHP or with Ruby + Rails?". This is a valid question for web developers.

    If we can only compare identical things, where's the comparison?

    If all you ever need is part of the tiny subset
    Actually, a framework is neither a superset nor a subset of a languages functionality.

    But that won't hold true for everyone.
    Yes! Good! It helps some people!

  5. #30
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Kaysville, UT
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Srirangan,

    I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand - the reason we are viewing PHP, in this case, as a tool for creating dynamic websites is because that is the context in which the original poster asked the question.

    I agree that comparing Rails vs PHP in general is silly, but that isn't what we are doing here. I'm well aware of PHP's other capabilities (hell, I've created desktop apps with it - I don't recommend it, but I've done it ), but we are talking about tools for creating dynamic websites.

    On a different note, while comparing Rails and PHP for web development is helpful, comparing Rails with a few PHP frameworks would be more helpful as others have pointed out. To that end, I'm planning on studying up on a few of the PHP frameworks (probably PHP on Trax and Symfony) and then writing a web app this weekend in:

    Ruby on Rails
    the PHP frameworks I decide on
    Pylons (Python)

    I'll try to document things like time required to build the app, lines of code, etc.. Hopefully this lead to some more useful comparisons.
    Spencer Uresk
    Rails App Hosting
    Cheap Hosting - Directory of hosting plans under $10/month!
    My blog: Tech and Java Articles

  6. #31
    SitePoint Addict jpease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    In the network.
    Posts
    217
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Here is my take:

    Why bother to learn Ruby on Rails?

    Please let me know what you think.

    BTW- For any getting worked up about how comparing PHP ("the language") with Ruby on Rails ("the framework") isn't fair, this is for you:

    Rails Envy: Ruby on Rails vs PHP

  7. #32
    SitePoint Zealot Biju's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    India
    Posts
    135
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    PHP faster deployment, Rails faster development.

    I would go for RUBY. PHP is a hard slog when it comes to big development projects.
    I suggest everyone to upgrade to Windows Vista.

  8. #33
    Beer drinker Srirangan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beerland!
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree. But the Ruby team needs to do the following:
    - Get Ruby code to Compile and Execute (instead of Interpret)
    - Get more Web Hosts to Support Ruby

    Only then will it be a serious small-medium competitor to PHP. Ruby, as of now, has most of the ingredients.
    Online Startups Insight for new entrepreneurs

  9. #34
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    986
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    - PHP is interpreted, and as slow as Ruby. Ruby is hard to compile due to some (unfortunate) language design decisions, but I agree that compilation is a good idea. PHP is hard to compile too.
    - There are plenty of Ruby & Rails hosts.

  10. #35
    Beer drinker Srirangan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beerland!
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenrir2 View Post
    - PHP is interpreted, and as slow as Ruby. Ruby is hard to compile due to some (unfortunate) language design decisions, but I agree that compilation is a good idea. PHP is hard to compile too.
    - There are plenty of Ruby & Rails hosts.
    Doesn't the Php 5 Engine compile and execute? In fact it does.
    Online Startups Insight for new entrepreneurs

  11. #36
    Beer drinker Srirangan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beerland!
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    - There are plenty of Ruby & Rails hosts.
    Oh cmon! Absolute numbers don't matter..
    Online Startups Insight for new entrepreneurs

  12. #37
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Kaysville, UT
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Srirangan View Post
    I agree. But the Ruby team needs to do the following:
    - Get Ruby code to Compile and Execute (instead of Interpret)
    Ruby is pretty slow, even compared to PHP - which is itself no speed demon. That said, I don't know that it is that much of a problem.

    - Get more Web Hosts to Support Ruby
    I have listed already on my website a dozen or more hosts that support Ruby. I have compiled information on 30 more that I am entering this evening. I'm still missing quite a few. The point is, there are tons of hosts who support Ruby, and if you are looking for hosting for Ruby, you can find pretty much anything between $5/month budget hosting and fully managed hosting with SLAs.

    Only then will it be a serious small-medium competitor to PHP. Ruby, as of now, has most of the ingredients.

    I think Ruby is already a pretty serious contender, but in order to catch PHP it needs the following:

    - Easier deployment. It isn't that hard to deploy Ruby/RoR apps, but it is still harder than PHP (just upload the file!).

    - More open source projects like phpBB, WordPress, Joomla, etc.. I think this is how a lot of PHP programmers start - by using an open source app like phpBB, deciding they want some new functionality, and hacking around in it a bit. Ruby has comparatively few projects like this.
    Spencer Uresk
    Rails App Hosting
    Cheap Hosting - Directory of hosting plans under $10/month!
    My blog: Tech and Java Articles

  13. #38
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    986
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Doesn't the Php 5 Engine compile and execute? In fact it does.
    Does it? I thought it executed bytecode, not machine code. This is bytecode compilation + execution, but a much greater speedup can be achieved with "real" compilation.

    Oh cmon! Absolute numbers don't matter..
    Yes they do. I don't care if there are enough or enough + 1 hosts. There are so many Rails hosts that you probably aren't going to take the time to compare them all.

  14. #39
    Beer drinker Srirangan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Beerland!
    Posts
    776
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenrir2 View Post
    Does it? I thought it executed bytecode, not machine code. This is bytecode compilation + execution, but a much greater speedup can be achieved with "real" compilation.



    Yes they do. I don't care if there are enough or enough + 1 hosts. There are so many Rails hosts that you probably aren't going to take the time to compare them all.
    Nope, the Compiler in Zend Engine does generate Opcode. Each line of this Opcode then gets individually executed by the Interpreter (in fact this is how most Compilers-Executers work!)

    Yes they do. I don't care if there are enough or enough + 1 hosts. There are so many Rails hosts that you probably aren't going to take the time to compare them all.
    Not for many. It will still be a while till my business can afford to purchase a dedicated server that supports Ruby. Of course mass demand will only improve the afford-ability factor.

    Of course this is not just Ruby specific, all new technologies take a bit of a while for all involved parties to get in sync.

    I have listed already on my website a dozen or more hosts that support Ruby. I have compiled information on 30 more that I am entering this evening. I'm still missing quite a few. The point is, there are tons of hosts who support Ruby, and if you are looking for hosting for Ruby, you can find pretty much anything between $5/month budget hosting and fully managed hosting with SLAs.
    The thing with Web Hosting is that there are so many crappy unreliable web hosts out there, that a prospective client would only pick among a limited set of 4-5 reputed hosts. This isn't even a debate, I can definitely find more reliable hosts for PHP4 than I can for PHP5 and Ruby. This hopefully should change in the coming years.
    Online Startups Insight for new entrepreneurs

  15. #40
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Kaysville, UT
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Srirangan View Post
    The thing with Web Hosting is that there are so many crappy unreliable web hosts out there, that a prospective client would only pick among a limited set of 4-5 reputed hosts. This isn't even a debate, I can definitely find more reliable hosts for PHP4 than I can for PHP5 and Ruby. This hopefully should change in the coming years.
    Come on. There certainly are crappy webhosts around, but there are more than enough good Ruby webhosts. You absolutely can find more php4 hosts than you can Ruby hosts, but you only need to find one. Of all the arguments against Ruby, this one is the worst.
    Spencer Uresk
    Rails App Hosting
    Cheap Hosting - Directory of hosting plans under $10/month!
    My blog: Tech and Java Articles

  16. #41
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    986
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Nope, the Compiler in Zend Engine does generate Opcode. Each line of this Opcode then gets individually executed by the Interpreter (in fact this is how most Compilers-Executers work!)
    Yes, so that's a bytecode compiler-interpreter...

    Not for many. It will still be a while till my business can afford to purchase a dedicated server that supports Ruby. Of course mass demand will only improve the afford-ability factor.
    There are shared-hosting providers that support Rails. Or are you saying that you already have a dedicated server that doesn't support Rails? Is it a cell phone?

  17. #42
    SitePoint Addict jpease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    In the network.
    Posts
    217
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Srirangan View Post
    Not for many. It will still be a while till my business can afford to purchase a dedicated server that supports Ruby.
    This is just silly. Are you saying dedicated servers cost more if you run Ruby on them?? If not, then what does your company's inability to afford a dedicated server have to do with anything?

    There is no reason that you have to have a dedicated server to run a Ruby on Rails web application.

    As far as reputable hosts: MediaTemple has a $20 package on their Grid Server which includes built-in Ruby on Rails support. If you need a little more "umph" there are many reputable VPS providers. Some of them require you to install Ruby yourself, which really isn't a big deal (assuming you are a developer). It would probably be a pain for a client, but then again, why would the client be setting up the hosting environment for a web application anyways?

  18. #43
    SitePoint Guru Skyblaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    734
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenrir2 View Post
    Yes, so that's a bytecode compiler-interpreter...



    There are shared-hosting providers that support Rails. Or are you saying that you already have a dedicated server that doesn't support Rails? Is it a cell phone?
    Also ruby is compiled in bytecode as for example python right? It is strange that even in a book as the pickaxe this isn't mentioned (or at least i didn't find it).

  19. #44
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    986
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Nope, Ruby has an AST-evaluator.

  20. #45
    SitePoint Wizard samsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    5,011
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the one weakness of Rails (from a hosting perspective) is the minimum ram allocation ... even a small Rails application will use 40-200 MB all the time. In comparison, a low-traffic Wordpress site might consume zero ram while it isn't being visited.

    This gets less important as sites get more traffic.

    So if you were aiming to make Wordpress, one application that gets deployed thousands of times in low traffic environments, Rails would be a poor choice. However, if you were making Blogger, which is (i assume) one application that is deployed once and supports thousands of blogs, you are back to a less important difference.
    Using your unpaid time to add free content to SitePoint Pty Ltd's portfolio?

  21. #46
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Alkmaar, Netherlands
    Posts
    710
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    1. I am much faster with Rails
    2. I am much happier with my code in Rails, it gives me the feeling I am more artistic beside being technical nerd.
    3. I am not scared coming back to my 5000 lines of Rails application after 6 months.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •