From: Francis Cianfrocca <garbagecat10@...>
Date: 2006-06-07T01:52:33+09:00
Subject: Re: I love Ruby - But how bright is Ruby's Future?

------=_Part_18214_13399531.1149612750273
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I'd like to see a serious enterprise-grade SOA framework that is either
written in an agile language or supports them well. Doesn't matter if it's
Ruby or Python. Python's Twisted has PB, but it's several steps short of
what is really needed. Ruby has nothing close yet.

On 6/6/06, James Britt <james_b@neurogami.com> wrote:
>
> Jeff Pritchard wrote:
> > ...
>
> > Since Rails is considered by many to be the "killer app" for Ruby, why
> > doesn't there seem to be a contender in the non-web-app type application
> > framework genre for Ruby?  Is there something about the language that
> > makes it an inappropriate choice for "real" application work, or is it
> > more just a matter of coincidence that the right group of people hasn't
> > done something as stellar as Rails in that space yet?
> >
>
> Perhaps there are languages that, by their nature, require an
> application framework exist before one can expect to build certain kinds
> of applications.  And there are there other languages where this is not
> needed; they make it easy enough to just grow your own application or
> in-house set of tools; they language helps avoid exploding complexity.
>
> It's similar to the complaint that Ruby does not have an IDE such as
> Eclipse; some Rubyists argue that there isn't one because there is no
> compelling need for it, as there is in Java.
>
>
>
> --
> James Britt
>
> http://www.ruby-doc.org       - Ruby Help & Documentation
> http://www.artima.com/rubycs/ - The Journal By & For Rubyists
> http://www.rubystuff.com      - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
> http://www.jamesbritt.com     - Playing with Better Toys
> http://www.30secondrule.com   - Building Better Tools
>
>

------=_Part_18214_13399531.1149612750273--