Re: Ruby On Rails on the iSeries

[Jerome Hughes <jromeh@xxxxxxx>]

Joe--

still smiling, said it in the last one, so will stick to informing  
about the technology here

> Actually, one of the complaints I've read about Rails is that it  
> doesn't understand foreign keys very well. I tried to understand  
> why not; as far as I can tell DHH insists that since he can't tell  
> whether a foreign key
> relationship is 1-1, 1-N or N-N, then he isn't going to do any of  
> them. This seems to me an odd concept for a convention-based  
> language, but he runs the ship.

What he's said is that he'll leave this to the developer to do, as  
they know what they are facing and want. You have to pick the things  
you want to make magic carefully. In other words, there's very little  
difference between 1-1 and 1-N, and if it's N-N, you need an  
intersection table, so you'll create it, if you're serious.

> Also, if your tables aren't named the way Rails like them (the name  
> of a table is plural, such as customers) and your columns aren't  
> named the way Rails wants them (a link to the customers table must  
> be called customer_id),
> then you lose much of RoR's ability to do things for you.  That's  
> the downside of "coding by convention".

Restated from a positive view, if you fight the way Rails works, you  
lose some of the goodness. But you can do so in order to adapt to  
legacy tables you can't change, if you must, though most people don't  
need to often. And the goodness is the upside of coding by convention.

> I am particularly not fond of the table naming silliness. What if I  
> have a list of octopi. Do I have to call the table octopuss?  <grin>

Rails knows about English pluralization, so it can handle things like  
this. Not sure if this extends to octopus/octopi, but if you have a  
list of octopi, it probably ought be abstracted to a higher level and  
called animals with a type of octopus so you'll be able to widen your  
scope later. ;D

> And please, remember, I am NOT downing RoR.

*cough* *cough* what? male bovine excrement.

> Both Ruby and Rails are examples of excellent programming done by  
> exceptionally talented people. I'm just trying to keep the hype to  
> a minimum so that we find out just how good these tools are WITHOUT  
> having to fend off the fanatics. I'll be happy to face the wrath of  
> the Inquisition if in the end it provides the impetus for an honest  
> appraisal of the tools.

Let's hear some discussion of baked in tests, test-driven design,  
database migrations, etc.

--Jerome

Learn, baby, learn, it's the zealot's inferno...