From: ahoward <ahoward@...>
Date: 2003-01-25T02:09:08+09:00
Subject: what's so great about narf?


web rubyists-

o.k., call me an idiot (it won't be the first time) but i've read the narf
docs and can't see what it really buys me? considering these facts :

  * the cgi, and cgi/session modules are well doccumented and easy enough to
    use ( p, = cgi['param']  isn't _that_ hard IMHO )

  * webunit can be used to unit test these cgis if desired.  see next point.

  * amirta makes it trivial to test cgi's since all they do is manipulate data
    anyhow (many cgi's i've converted to amrita end up going from hundreds of
    lines to tens so testing is often overkill - just tidy/validate the html
    and your off)

now.  when i look and other web packages like CGIKit or IOWA is see
significant gains in the areas of simplicity and funcionality, but narf just
seems like another API?  please note that i asked to be called an idiot so can
somebody please set me straight because i'm obvioulsy missing something?  also
note that i'm not really after academic differences, but real-world functional
differences that i seem to be missing...

thanks in advance for any insights.

-ara

-- 

 ====================================
 | Ara Howard
 | NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory
 | Information and Technology Services
 | Data Systems Group
 | R/FST 325 Broadway
 | Boulder, CO 80305-3328
 | Email: ahoward@fsl.noaa.gov
 | Phone:  303-497-7238
 | Fax:    303-497-7259
 ====================================