Slashdot Log In
Apple Publishes Ruby On Rails Tutorial
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Tue Feb 28, 2006 06:22 AM
from the big-pictures-that-ever-your-manager-can-understand dept.
from the big-pictures-that-ever-your-manager-can-understand dept.
bonch writes "Apple has noticed the high amount of Mac usage in the Ruby on Rails community and has posted an illustrated Ruby on Rails tutorial. The document goes into more concise detail in getting new users up to speed, from database schema to moving beyond scaffolding, all done with the favored Rails editor, Textmate."
Related Stories
[+]
Ruby on Rails 1.0 Released 332 comments
Simon (S2) writes "Ruby on Rails 1.0 has been released. From the announcement: 'Rails 1.0 is mostly about making all the work we've been doing solid. So it's not packed with new features over 0.14.x, but has spit, polish, and long nights applied to iron out kinks and ensure that it
works mostly right, most of the time, for most of the people.' " The Ruby on Rails website has also been given a new look.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Apple Publishes Ruby On Rails Tutorial
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 228 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
nice (Score:1)
(http://i.nt.ro/)
Ruby Is Groovy (Score:5, Funny)
(http://obsessivemathsfreak.org/ | Last Journal: Friday June 09 2006, @08:15PM)
Gates: C# with
Jobs: Man! Talk about Squaresville! Ruby is hip man! It's a love machine. A child of the earth.
Torvalds: Ruby is based on perl, which is in turn based on bash scripting, which I like.
Jobs: You see man! Ruby is a free spirit. It grows in like, the sunshine. It doesn't obey your rules!
Gates: But it's just another paradigm.
Jobs: On Rails man! Rails!!! It's like hyperspeed into the cosmos. And that's why its fit for Apple's attention. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go get some podcasts over rss, browse some blogs, do some yoga. You dig?
***Jobs walk's away clicking fingers rhythmicly***
Gates: But it's all just flash and hype. Nothing really new is going on!
Torvalds: Look man. I really just don't give a shit.
Now is the time... (Score:2)
O'Reilly to the rescue (Score:1, Offtopic)
(http://www.christopherculver.com/)
Baskin Robins (Score:2, Funny)
This month only though, flavor of the month. Next month they're doing AJAX.
OS X Ruby doesn't work with Rails? (Score:2)
So my question is: if Apple thinks Ruby on Rails is such hot shit, why doesn't they just upgrade their version to 1.8.4 via Software Update?
Re:OS X Ruby doesn't work with Rails? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Because it's probably not fully tested to work with Tiger. The only system updates you get with Software Update and bug fixes and security fixes. Occasionally you'll get something else which works behind the scenes with an updated iApp as well (there have been minor CoreImage and other framework pieces updated this way).
This is just good sense, it's stability vs. cutting edge. Also it can be a very bad thing to update the system incrementally (Ask Microsoft who have been bitten by this many times... often updating one thing can have unexpected results on others.
Also, for a developers interested in using Rails, updating Ruby is fairly trivial. I would also add that often even if Apple includes the latest version of something you may want to compile it yourself anyway (Apache, PHP. MySQL are good examples of things that people will often *upgrade* right out of the box).
Looks interesting (Score:1)
How does it stack up against Java for ease of development and/or performance/flexibility?
Another great tutorial, but.... (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Sunday May 15 2005, @08:03PM)
For example, suppose you have a time field, not a date field, no year, just time. And you want to create that element in your webform.
If it were date, you'd use date_select, pass it the name of the object and the name of the field, and your done, you get a nice input box. Suppose you want the same thing for time, its still date select with a series of discard attributes, e.g.
date_select('meeting','starttime',
However, you as the person looking for the documentation for this are led on somewhat of a goose chase becuase your time input box information is not even close to what you'd expect (time_select perhaps?) and you should be looking under "date" for "time".
(Incidentally, Rails 1.0 has a bug where it seems to ignore
It's good day (Score:1)
Especialy when I hope to be one of them
In what (will be) new in rails 1.1 [scottraymond.net], you will find more interesting stuff about that beautiful framework and its future. Worth reading if you are flirting with RoR.
Usual omission... (Score:1, Insightful)
Nooo! You've got to get security right from the start! Start with minimal privilege and add only that that is required. Otherwise you'll end up with an unholy holey mess.
If your web-based framework lets you write something that lets you modify anything on the server without either logging in or explicitly telling the code its okay, then choose another framework ASAP.
Yes you can add-on security to RoR, but it'll always be an add-on...
Apple did'nt write this tutorial (Score:1)
(http://www.concept10.wordpress.com/)
The Apple Developer Connection doesn't supply any attribution for their articles, but this one was written by none other than Mike Clark [clarkware.com], who along with Dave Thomas [pragprog.com] runs the always-sold-out Pragmatic Studio [pragmaticstudio.com] series of Ruby on Rails and Ajax training.
Not exactly provided by Apple... (Score:2)
(http://www.larrymyers.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 14 2004, @06:42PM)
Concise, interesting (Score:2)
(http://jimmybearpearson.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday November 09 2006, @10:10AM)
I agree that the article should be attributed. It's important to give credit where credit is due. It's also interesting that the article mentions http://macromates.com/ [slashdot.org]">TextMate. TextMate is a nice concept.
Simple tutorials like this are critical to the adoption of many technologies - but it would be nice to see better documentation about the everyday use of Ruby and ROR {nudge, nudge}.
To pre-empt nuclear (or as the prez sez: new-queue-lurr) return strikes, let me say this: Tools like Ruby can be a real treat. I love the use of many languages (Java, Smalltalk, ObjC, etc.), but other, more lightweight tools make things come together in a big way for lots of jobs - use the tool and/or environment that works best, and do your best to work your craft the best way you can. It isn't about platforms or languages - its about design, solving problems for the users, and maybe getting to make a living along the way.
But where would you use it? (Score:1)
Because nobody wants to be a LAMR (Score:1)
(http://genesoldiers.webforte.com/)
Unlike Linux-Apache-Mysql-Php/Perl/Python which has the nice acronym LAMP. Linux-Apache-Mysql-Ruby has the rather unfortunate acronym LAMR (pronouced lamer).
I'll stick with developing RoR on OS X.
If you're interested in my lates RoR project, check out: OSWiki [sourceforge.net]
Rails users, evangelize (Score:2)
(http://www.gravitycollapse.com/)
So, my question is this: how easy is it if you want to have a more complex visual layout? What If I want a form to submit to an encrypted text file? What if I need to work this system into a very intricate design?
What I'm trying to get at is: does its simplicity w/r/t getting something quick and dirty together mean it's a pain in the ass when you want to do something very special with it? Or is it equally easy to completely customize and change?
Rails is OK, but exposes too much SQL (Score:3, Informative)
(http://seankelly.biz/)
See also this screencast [nasa.gov] for a comparison of Ruby on Rails, Zope (Plone), TurboGears, and Django. Oh, and J2EE which fares ... rather poorly in my opinion.
Warning: the screencast is 36 minutes long!
The right tool? (Score:2)
Everything I'm seeing about Ruby on Rails says it's great for making "Web Applications". I'm going to start designing a new dynamic website soon, and I was wondering about building it using RoR.
I just want to use CSS, and plug the whole thing into a database.
So are they just buzzwording me, or is RoR the wrong tool to use for something like this?
I'm trying to learn RoR, but I have some issues (Score:2)
And I'm not impressed with Apple's tutorial. Why use the migration? I prefer to create my tables with good ol' SQL saved to a text file. Store it in the db subdirectory of your Rails app. Then import it into your favorite database (plug for PostgreSQL).
Compared with Django, RoR doesn't cut it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Django [djangoproject.com] is where the musics at. And for good reasons too. It's more mature, easyer to use, faster in developement, less performance hungry, has a documentation that's up to date and has a grown up backend kit. It's only that they GPLd it last summer, that's why it hasn't gotten all the press yet.
And this is not to start a flamewar. Compare them both and you'll see what I mean.
The RoR and Django guys are good friends btw.
I thought it sounded familiar (Score:2)
(http://marshonsmacs.blogspot.com/)
Wish they'd spend this time patching bugs (Score:1)
However, I wish they'd spend some more time fixing important security holes in their OS rather than writing articles. We still don't have a patch for this Extremely Critical vulnerability http://secunia.com/advisories/18963 [secunia.com]. And it's been a week now.
I'd rather have a secure OS running on my powerbook than a tutorial on some programming language I've never heard of before
P.S.: This is not intended as a flame, just as a question where Apple's priorities lie.
no Locomotive love? (Score:3, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Python? (Score:1, Interesting)
WebObjects (Score:3, Interesting)
It really is the best kept secret in the web app world. If you've not tried it, you might want to give it a shot.
Hey, What about Catalyst (Score:2, Interesting)
(http://www.superbad.com/)
Catalyst [perl.org] is the hot new Perl based Model-View-Controller framework. It's been out for about a year, it's production ready easy for any competent programmer to work with, and backed by massive collection of libraries on CPAN [cpan.org]. It has a large friendly and active user community, which you can find via the website.
Me, I'm using it for lots of things - my project of the moment is gluing in some of the tasty AI modules on CPAN into it for automatic classification.
mysql wide open? (Score:2)
Re:So.. (Score:2)
(http://www.berkshirephotonics.com/)
Re:Figures (Score:2)
Only those developers who can't see that a tight coupling between your code and your database is not a good idea.
Re:anagram (Score:1)
Re:what's so special about RoR? (Score:2)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Well for one thing, they are designing it from the ground up to be safer than PHP. I actually do like PHP but damn, it's so easy to shoot yourself in the foot! I think I'm a good programmer. I constantly think about things like SQL injection. I read all the PHP documentation about the mail() function, but sure enough, I opened myself up to being a spam relay. I don't know if I was hit, but I had code out there that was vulnerable.
But I followed the docs!!
Re:Mac and Ruby history (Score:2)
No - it is a killer app for getting mentions on Slashdot.
Having a development system with the relative lack of performance of Ruby, and the very close tie-in to the database and schema of Rails is more of a website killer than an killer app, I am afraid to report.