From: "s.ross" <cwdinfo@...>
Date: 2008-02-16T08:11:30+09:00
Subject: Re: How to put a Ruby website online without rails

On Feb 15, 2008, at 2:34 PM, Michael Granger wrote:

>> You probably can't even create
>> multiple threads running  ruby safely (as opposed to creating  
>> multiple
>> ruby threads inside one native thread of execution as is done in the
>> interpreter).
>
>
> Please, if you must post advice against using a particular piece of  
> software, please provide concrete evidence of its unsuitability.  
> Conjecture is mildly interesting in some situations, but when you  
> impugn someone else's hard work you should at least have the  
> courtesy to give examples, hard facts, or at the very least stick to  
> points which you don't have to qualify with "probably".
>
> I'd be happy to provide further details if anyone's interested. I'm  
> just getting tired of the FUD and hastily-posted conjecture about  
> what constitutes appropriate technology for building web applications.

Yes, I am interested. There is a widely-held perception based on  
information from well-respected Rubyists and Rails people that  
mod_ruby has problems related to managing re-entrant code. This might  
translate to: "Most users don't have the background to set mutexes so  
they will eventually stomp on data that's not thread-save" but it  
might also translate to: "This ain't mod_php, guys. You can do bad  
things and never know until it's too late."

So, yes, a clarification would be extremely useful.