I am learning Rails and have very little idea about Sinatra & Merb. I was wondering are the situations where you would use Merb/Sinatra.
Thanks for your feedback!
Sinatra is a much smaller, lighter weight framework than Rails. It is used if you want to get something up running quickly that just dispatches off of a few URLs and returns some simple content. Take a look at the Sinatra home page; that is all you need to get a "Hello, World" up and running, while in Rails you would need to generate a whole project structure, set up a controller and a view, set up routing, and so on (I haven't written a Rails app in a while, so I don't know exactly how many steps "Hello, World" is, but its certainly more than Sinatra). Sinatra also has far fewer dependencies than Rails, so it's easier to install and run.
We are using Sinatra as a quick test web server for some web client libraries that we're writing now. The fact that we can write one single file and include all of our logic in that one file, and have very few dependencies, means it's a lot easier to work with and run our tests than if you had a Rails app.
Merb is being merged into Rails, so pretty soon there shouldn't really be any reason to use one over the other. It was originally designed to be a bit lighter weight and more decoupled than Rails; Rails had more built in assumptions that you would use ActiveRecord. But as they are merging the two, they are decoupling Rails in similar ways, so if you're already learning Rails, then it's probably worth it to just stick with that and follow the developments as they come.
I can't speak much for Merb, but Sinatra is highly effective for small or lightweight solutions. If you aren't working with a whole lot of code, or don't need a huge website, you can code a very effective site with Sinatra either as fast, or twice as fast as on Rails (in my own opinion).
Sinatra is also excellent for fragmentary pieces of an application, for instance the front-end to a statistics package. Or something like ErrCount, which is just a really simple hit counter.
So think about light, fast, and highly simplistic web applications (though complexity is your choice) when using Sinatra.
The way things are going, it's going to be a moot question soon.
As mentioned already, Merb 2.0 and Rails 3.0 are going to be the same thing. The newly-combined Merb and Rails core teams are already at work on achieving that. I don't know if they're still planning on a release (probably a beta) by RailsConf in May, but it's definitely happening this year.
If you're dead set on using an ORM other than ActiveRecord, for example, you might start with Merb now and update when 2.0 (Rails 3.0) ships. Right now, Merb is generally accepted to provide a better framework for varying one's components than Rails.
Sinatra looks like a brilliant solution for a web app that has low interface complexity and somewhat lower model-level code than would be normal for Merb/Rails. Implementing straightforward RESTful APIs would be one great use. I'm less convinced about its value when any quantity of HTML is involved, even less so when templating gets involved.
Again, with Rails (and hence Merb soon) now sitting on top of Rack, there's no reason not to include baby Sinatra apps into the solution: they can live together. There's a blog post that discusses that very concept
Related
I've been programming in Rails for about 7 months now. Mainly an app to aministrate a database, you know, clean up, update, delete, find orphaned entries etc.
I have an API that talks to our desktop programs written in PHP. We now find ourselves wanting to move everything over to Ruby. This API needs to be lightning quick and will not have any views or HTML pages of any sort, it will only communicate with our apps via JSON, sending and receiving data that the apps will then display and work with.
So, the basic question is, should I learn Sinatra and Padrino (with ActiveRecord) and build the API with them, or do it in Rails?
If I use Rails I could keep a lot of the code I have or even use the existing code since all the tables are the same (database is the same) and just write more methods for the API.
The downside I see to this is twofold:
It means the code is harder to manage and read because now we have the API bit and all the maintenance bit.
It would mean that the same Ruby app is doing double work so the API would not be as fast as if it were running in another, separate Ruby app.
Already the Rails app is not great speedwise but I suspect this has more to do with our hosting solution than Rails itself.
Learning Sinatra and Padrino might be more work, but would lead to cleaner code and a separate Ruby app for the API and another one for the maintenance which sounds nicer.
But I don't know anything about Sinatra and Padrino, is the footprint and speed really that better than Rails?
I would greatly appreciate opinions from people who have actually used both Rails and Sinatra with Padrino on this.
Cheers.
Sinatra and Padrino are not automatically faster than Rails. They are just smaller than Rails (and supply the developer with a smaller, more focussed toolkit). Application speed mostly depends on your code (and algorithm). The same is often true for elegance, maintenability and other aspects.
If you already have good, maintenable code that runs on Rails, most likely you should just improve it. Make it faster with a good hosting/caching solution and keep it elegant and maintenable with refactoring.
Nowadays, both Rails and Sinatra offer very good support for the development of RESTful webservices and, more generally, for the development of UI-less APIs. Rails is just larger and takes more time to be tamed but, luckily, you do not have to study and use all of this behemot to get your job done. An application running on Rails can be as fast and elegant as one running on Sinatra because the Rails subset actually used to handle REST requests is as small and elegant as the whole Sinatra framework. Hence, application speed mainly depends on your code and on your hosting/caching choices.
On the other side, you ought learn Sinatra and Padrino in any case. These frameworks are two of the most elegant and fascinating pieces of software I have ever seen. They absolutely deserve your attention. Just keep in mind that Sinatra, used alone, is normally not enough for anything more complex than a UI-less RESTful API. Most likely a real, full-blown web application will require Padrino.
If you have an existing Rails app already, it might be easier to port it over to rails-api. It's basically just Rails but stripped of all components used in making UIs.
I haven't personally used it but I was evaluating it for a project a few months ago.
Are there any web frameworks on top of EventMachine? So far, I've found Fastr and Cramp. Both seem to be outdated.
Moreover, Googling how to setup Rails + EventMachine, returns a limited amount of results.
NodeJS is really nothing new. Evented I/O has been around for a very long time (Twisted for Python and EventMachine for Ruby). However, what attracts me to NodeJS, is the implementations that are built on top of it.
For example. NodeJS has TowerJS. Among plenty others. Perhaps, this is one of the many contributing reasons to its trending factor.
What I like most about TowerJS, is its Rails-like structure. Is there anything like it for EventMachine?
Goliath is an open source version of the non-blocking (asynchronous) Ruby web server framework.
You may find async sinatra interesting
Besides EventMachine and the others mentioned here, there's vert.x. I'm not sure how much of a "web framework" it is, but its site shows examples for a simple app like one might write in Sinatra.
I'm starting a new project and I have maybe three resources defined. Not a lot of code so far. (Rails 3.1)
But I'm interested in trying out DataMapper. I'm used to ActiveRecord (and actually enjoy it) but I'm always on the lookout for new things. Plus, my application uses Backbone.js but I don't believe that's relevant.
So how hard is it to switch out the ORM "mid-app" like this and do you think the learning curve to DM is that hard?
PS, there is a chance that I might be using other engines alongside my application. Such as MongoDB running along with Postgres. Will DM be at an advantage there?
To use Datamapper itself, there isn't much to it but it is some of the Rails niceties that require additional work (like the SQL execution times in "rails s") and there is also the rake tasks.
Check out dm-rails - They have a template that you use to provision the initial Rails project that sets it up with everything for Datamapper. You can also look through the source and see how it hooks everything. There is a small issue if you use database-backed session stores with Datamapper, which involves a monkey patch.
I want to write a web application and want to use Ruby. I have no knowledge of Ruby as of now and I want to write this app. to learn Ruby.
Is Ruby alone sufficient to write a web application or Rails need to be included?
You sound like you're interested in writing something in a barebones fashion.
For that then the Sinatra framework might be more approachable.
You could also use Heroku's service to make the deployment and hosting of your web application simple. I can't overstate how slick Heroku is - it's a masterclass in design and user experience!
The only thing you need to made a simplest web application with Ruby is rack. It's used by all Framework in Ruby. And all server like Passenger/Thin/unicorn/mongrel are rack compatible.
So you can put the must simplest ruby web application like that :
class HelloWorld
def call(env)
[200, {"Content-Type" => "text/plain"}, ["Hello world!"]]
end
end
But the dynamic system are more difficult. So a framework is really helpful.
Yes, you can, depending on your development environment. The most common approach that doesn't use any framework, such as Rails, is to use Apache with modruby/eruby. See http://www.modruby.net/en/ for more information (also wikipedias eruby entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERuby)
And, technically speaking, Rails is just a framework written in Ruby, so it's technically still "just ruby" :)
Here is a list of other frameworks than Rails.
You might want to start with Sinatra : it's really small and lets you focus more on the Ruby-learning than on the framework-learning.
Ruby is sufficient but you would have to wire the http server (like webrick/apache/mongrel) with the application you are writing by yourself.
I'd recommend, as to avoid this wireing, to use a simple basic framework like sinatrarb http://www.sinatrarb.com/
Ruby is sufficient, but I wouldn't recommend it. I would recommend working with a framework until you're comfortable with Ruby.
You may want to start even smaller though.
I would definitely use Rails if I were you. Although you can build a website using only Ruby, it's a bit overkill, and you sure can get a lot more using Rails.
A great start for learning Rails (that's where I started) is:
http://headfirstlabs.com/books/hfrails/
There's a few chapters in there you can read. It's really good, and will give you a nice and solid introduction.
Edit
Also, you can use Mongrel, Webrick, lighttpd, Apache etc with it with no problems
You can start off by checking out Chapter 18 (and the rest) of the "Pickaxe Book" titled Ruby and the Web. You can find the online version here to see the nitty gritty of writing Ruby only scripts for a website. There are many options to choose from, most of which have been already suggested here, that will get your website running much quicker and easier.
I have recently designed a web application that I would like to write in Ruby. Coming from a ASP background I designed it with method and fields and linked them together (in my diagram and UML) like I would do it in C#.
However, now that I've moved from a single app to MVC I have no idea where my code goes or how the pieces are linked.
For example, my application basically collects information from various sources for users, and when they log in the information is presented to them with "new" information (information collected since last login) is tagged specially in the interface.
In C# I would have a main loop that waits let's say 5 minutes and does the collection, then when a client tries to connect it would spawn a new thread that generates the page with the new information. Now that I'm moving to Ruby I'm not sure how to achieve the same result.
I understand that the controller connects the model to the view and I thus assume this is where my code goes yet I've haven't seen a tutorial that talks about doing what I've mentioned. If someone could point me to one or tell me precisely what I need to do to turn my pseudocode into production code I'd be extremely grateful and probably will still have hair: D
EDIT: Somehow I forgot to mention that I'll be using the Rails framework. I don't really like Ruby but RoR is so nice together that I think I can put up with it.
The part of your application that is retrieving the data at certain interval shouldn't be, strictly speaking, part of the web application. In Unix world (including Rails), it would be implemented either as a daemon process, or a cron job. On Windows, I presume that Windows service is the right tool.
Regarding C# -> Ruby transition, if that's purely for Rails, I'd listen to the George's advice and give ASP.NET MVC a shot, as it resembles Rails logic pretty closely (some would call it a ripoff, I guess ;)). However, learning a new language, especially so different than C# as Ruby is, is always a good idea and a way to improve yourself as a developer.
I realize you want to move to Ruby; but you may want to give ASP.NET MVC a shot. It's the MVC framework on the ASP.NET platform.
Coming from ASP, you're going to have to do a lot of conversion to change your code to become more modular. Much more than any one post on Stack Overflow will do justice.
MVC is made up into 'tiers':
Model - Your Data
View - What the user Sees
Controller - Handles requests and communicates with the View and Model.
Pick up a book on ASP.NET MVC 1.0, and do some research on the MVC pattern. It's worth it.
Whatever Ruby web framework you plan to use (Rails, merb, Sinatra), it sounds like the portion that collects this data would typically be handled by a background task. Your models would be representations of this data, and the rest of your web app would be pretty standard.
There are some good Railscast episodes on performing tasks in the background:
Rake in Background
Starling and Workling
Custom Daemon
Delayed Job
There are other options for performing tasks in the background (such as using a message queue and the ActiveMessaging plugin) but these screen casts will at least give you a feel for how background jobs are generally approached in Rails.
If you perform these tasks on a regular schedule, there are tools for that as well.
I hope this is of some help.
Check out Rails for .NET Developers. I've heard good things about this book and it sounds like it's just what you're looking for.