From: Justin Bailey Date: 2006-03-24T01:21:45+09:00 Subject: Re: Rails vs. Ruby Evolution ------=_Part_665_26697361.1143130888902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Care to elaborate? Not asking for a flame war or anything. I've used Rails quite a bit and wanted to give Nitro a try on a toy project to see how I like it, but I've also tried to use Facets before and found it to not be well-documented, which irritated me. What is it about Facets you are concerned with? On 3/23/06, Austin Ziegler wrote: > > On 3/22/06, Avdi Grimm wrote: > > On 3/22/06, Bill Kelly wrote: > >> I like the approach taken by Nitro (http://www.nitrohq.com/) which > >> seems to be working in close collaboration with the facets > >> (http://facets.rubyforge.org/) library. I'm just learning Nitro, but > >> from what I've read, they seem to be consciously factoring their core > >> extensions out to the facets library where appropriate, which makes > >> those extensions available for anyone to use, on a method-by-method > >> granularity. Neat. :) > > There's a fair amount of overlap between ActiveSupport and Facets, > > from what I've seen. It would be nice if the Rails team would > > collaborate with the Facets team, since the original intent of Facets, > > as I understand it, was to provide a single source for all the handy > > extensions people were coming up with. > > I would prefer that they didn't. The primary maintainer of Facets has > some odd notions on what should and should not be in Ruby, the language > that I think makes Facets nigh-unusable. > > I would prefer to see something that does what Facets does, but does it > smarter and without trying to change the way that Ruby itself works. > This is unlikely to happen under the current maintainer of Facets. > > -austin > -- > Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com > * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca > ------=_Part_665_26697361.1143130888902--