[haXe] Rails-like framework for haxe

[Ralf Bokelberg]

Hm,
doesn't this mean, you throw away most of the database functionality?
Cheers,
Ralf.

On 9/14/06, Benjamin Dasnois <benjamin.dasnois at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I've never used Rubu nor RoR but I did develop some websites
> using PHP, and when I wanted to save some objects in a mysql database
> I first serialized them as String. My objects had a method toString()
> and a method fromString(). I think it's a really good idea as it means
> that we only deal with standard types that are available across all
> database providers. And even better: strings are also available across
> all languages, we're not relying on a language's specific feature that
> may not be available in an other one and therefore makes it
> non-interoperable.
>
> Just my 0.02 euros
>
> On 9/14/06, hank williams <hank777 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9/14/06, Nicolas Cannasse <ncannasse at motion-twin.com> wrote:
> > > > I love the agile development model rails brings.
> > > >
> > > > Do you think it would be a good idea to implement a similar framework in
> > > > haXe? Maybe we could start such a project...
> > >
> > > SPOD is already such an attempt, but of course does not implement all
> > > Rails features. One difficulty is that Ruby is dynamicly typed so a lot
> > > of tricky things are possible, while in haXe you want to keep strict
> > > typing as much as possible.
> > >
> >
> > I have not looked at SPOD and know nothing about rails, but would it
> > not be possible (and good) to implement a database layer dynamically
> > instead of worrying about types.
> >
> > I have my own database layer that I have written in Java. No doubt it
> > is not as good or as generic as rails activerecord, but it does do a
> > bunch of powerful things that I suspect activerecord wont do, and more
> > importantly I know it inside out and it works.
> >
> > The interesting thing about it is that because everything needs to be
> > converted into a string to work with it, for the most part, I deal
> > with everything as a string. I have no issues with compiler errors,
> > and the truth is I dont think that much about typing in the context of
> > database stuff. I havent thought much about why that is except that I
> > believe it has something to do with how smart and flexible SQL and
> > jdbc are.
> >
> > I guess the point is this. Given that ruby is dynamically typed and
> > rails seems to kick ass, including your statement that "a lot of
> > tricky things are possible", perhaps best practices for database stuff
> > is really leveraging as much dynamic typing as possible. You seem to
> > be focused on one feature of the language saying "in haXe you want to
> > keep strict typing as much as possible." But perhaps this is untrue.
> > Perhaps in haXe, when writing database code, you should *not* use
> > strong typing. The fact that you made a language that allows both, it
> > seems to me, doesnt mean its important to always use strong typing.
> > And whenever I hear about rails it sees that dynamic typing is what
> > makes it good, and no one seems to be complaining that "there is not
> > enough strong typing".
> >
> > Maybe for databases strong typing just gets in the way? You say that
> > SPOD increases library usability, but the rails experts on here
> > consistently say that rails and activerecord are better. And rails is
> > taking over the net. Perhaps your assesment about what really makes
> > development for databases easier is, in this regard, incorrect.
> >
> > Regards
> > Hank
> >
> > --
> > haXe - an open source web programming language
> > http://haxe.org
> >
>
>
> --
> DASNOIS Benjamin
> http://adevelopersblog.blogthing.com
>
> --
> haXe - an open source web programming language
> http://haxe.org
>


-- 
Ralf Bokelberg <ralf.bokelberg at gmail.com>
Flex & Flash Consultant based in Cologne/Germany