WishList for Play! framework

[Claudiu Clau]

hi there!

I found my self in occurred situation. I love RoR framework, but i'm falling inlove with play and scala :)

Play! has the unique opportunity. Not the make the same mistake that RoR people make it

Tu much words and no action :) 

I wish in the future, maybe not so far far away, some stuff from RoR :)

I miss:

• generators (rails g controller, rails g model)
• helper methods
• plugin repository
• good documentation
• good tutorials
• scala for web(You don't have the learn all the ruby language to be good at RoR, well not at the beginning :)
• ORM ( Active Support.. rulez :)
• a nice REST integration 
• a good routes files(ex: root :to=>"controller#action", nested rules, group routes, etc)
• Validation at the model level

The list is OPEN until Christmas

[Brian Nesbitt]

1. generators : do I really need that many files?  I enjoy the fact there isn't a generator yet (not that I would probably use it anyway) but that could be easily created as an add on.

2. helper methods : take a look at FastTags and Extensions... for 2.0 they are going in by final release but its pretty easy to add your own at this point

3. plugin repository : http://www.playframework.org/modules

4. good documentation : http://www.playframework.org/documentation/1.2.3/home  Its not that bad ?!?  Not to mention this google group.

5. good tutorials: http://www.playframework.org/documentation/1.2.3/guide1  https://github.com/playframework/play/tree/master/samples-and-tests

    and for 2.0 beta already 3 exist per language: https://github.com/playframework/Play20/tree/master/samples

6. scala for web : (????)  My scala knowledge is very minimal but I can create a site using the scala module and/or with 2.0

7. ORM : hibernate, ebean ? I know scala uses anorm but you can drop in something else if you want... not too mention  http://openmymind.net/2011/11/18/I-Just-Dont-Like-Object-Mappers/

8. REST integration : http://www.playframework.org/documentation/1.2.3/routes 

9. see 8 (group routes not included)

10. Validation in the model : https://github.com/playframework/play/blob/master/samples-and-tests/yabe/app/models/User.java

[Rakesh Waghela]

This interaction shows , how easily people catch up on play ! and become passionate enough to share solutions / answers in details :) Play ! rules.

[Florian]

I also prefer Play to Ruby on Rails, but Rails still has some big advantages.

There are much more plugins, better documentation and great tutorials.

But in my opinion Play could become something like Rails for the Java world, so let's work on that. :-)

[Pascal Voitot Dev]

Don't forget that play has something RoR will never have: all the java libraries... this remains a huge advantage on anything, isn't it?

Pascal

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "play-framework" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/play-framework/-/c2to0ygbgpoJ.

To post to this group, send email to play-fr...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to play-framewor...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/play-framework?hl=en.

[Marcos Pereira]

Not true since you can use jruby to run you rails applications. 

Anyway, besides that fact that ruby is a language way more expressive than java, I can see some areas where rails is ahead of (play and) any other web framework for usual applications.

1) Routes: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html

Routes in rails are just great! Methods like "resources", "namespaces", "constraints" or capabilities like "nested resources" are really powerful while stills simple. I also really like the fact that is easy to test your routes.

2) respond_to do |format| inside controllers: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/action_controller_overview.html#rendering-xml-and-json-data

renderJSON and renderXML are not good enough for content negotiation.

3) Active Record scopes: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_querying.html#scopes

Almost sure that a similar idiom cannot be achieve with Java, but maybe with Scala/Anorm.

4) Documentation and tutorials

That is closely related to how active the community is. It is our responsibilities write better tutorials/blog posts/code snippets/wiki content/books/news for play. How much are you guys contributing? I'm doing bad, just some very small contributions in code snippets and mail list. :-(

just my 2 cents.

--
http://about.me/marcospereira

[Marcos Pereira]

Commenting about the points in original post:

• generators (rails g controller, rails g model)

Mixed feelings here: while generators are good for keep the conventions imposed by framework, I don't know if they are good when you are starting because they generate too much things. Actually, in Rails, the fact that you can't "revert" what was generated also is annoying.

• helper methods

Fast tags, Extensions and you own templates tags. 

• plugin repository

Done thought modules/sub-projects, as Brian explained. 

• good documentation
• good tutorials

As I said, our responsibilities.  

• scala for web(You don't have the learn all the ruby language to be good at RoR, well not at the beginning :)

Here I think that play is ahead because the way play reports erros are just amazing. Way ahead any other framework (including those not related to web development). So, code and get a great report will probably help a lot while learning how to develop you application using Scala instead of Java.

 

• ORM ( Active Support.. rulez :)
• a nice REST integration 
• a good routes files(ex: root :to=>"controller#action", nested rules, group routes, etc)

My points in the previous email. 

• Validation at the model level

There are a lot of validations/annotations disposable, but maybe we stills lack some basic ones (like unique, inclusion, exclusion).

Kind Regards,

--

Marcos Pereira

[tschundeee]

I want something like rails/console (which i think is coming in play
2) and something like formtastic or simple_form gems. form handling is
pain in the ass in play compared to rails with one of these plugins...

On 18 Nov., 21:56, Claudiu Clau <claudiu.ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi there!
>
> I found my self in occurred situation. I love RoR framework, but i'm
> falling inlove with play and scala :)
> Play! has the unique opportunity. Not the make the same mistake that RoR
> people make it
> Tu much words and no action :)
> I wish in the future, maybe not so far far away, some stuff from RoR :)
> I miss:
>

>    - generators (rails g controller, rails g model)
>    - helper methods
>    - plugin repository
>    - good documentation
>    - good tutorials
>    - scala for web(You don't have the learn all the ruby language to be

>    good at RoR, well not at the beginning :)

>    - ORM ( Active Support.. rulez :)
>    - a nice REST integration
>    - a good routes files(ex: root :to=>"controller#action", nested rules,
>    group routes, etc)
>    - Validation at the model level

[Marius Soutier]

Hi,

On 19.11.2011, at 20:31, Marcos Pereira wrote:

Anyway, besides that fact that ruby is a language way more expressive than java

This is a big advantage, yes, but luckily we'll soon have full Scala support.

1) Routes: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html

Routes in rails are just great! Methods like "resources", "namespaces", "constraints" or capabilities like "nested resources" are really powerful while stills simple. I also really like the fact that is easy to test your routes.

Can you give an example what Routes you can define in Rails that you can't in Play?

2) respond_to do |format| inside controllers: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/action_controller_overview.html#rendering-xml-and-json-data

renderJSON and renderXML are not good enough for content negotiation.

I don't understand this point. In a Play controller, you can also access request.format.

if ("json".equals(request.format))

          renderJSON(fruits);

With Scala it will be as expressive as the Rails example.

request.format match {

  "json" => ...

  "xml" => ...

  _ => Ok

}

- Marius

[Marcos Pereira]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Marius Soutier <mps...@googlemail.com> wrote:

This is a big advantage, yes, but luckily we'll soon have full Scala support.

Yes. That is a great step for the framework. I was even thinking about how complicated (or easy) is to make play support other languages that are disposable for jvm. Like Fantom: http://fantom.org/ :-)

 

Can you give an example what Routes you can define in Rails that you can't in Play?

Route globbing and advanced constraints? Not sure about how to do them in Play. Anyway, that is not the point: you can probably achieve the same thing using Struts, right? The point is how simple and expressive is the support offered by the framework.

I'm very satisfied with route support in Play, but I can negate that this:

resources :users

Is more simple and direct than define a route for every controller action.

I don't understand this point. In a Play controller, you can also access request.format.

if ("json".equals(request.format))

          renderJSON(fruits);

Well, again that is doable, for sure, but is not as expressive as ...

 

With Scala it will be as expressive as the Rails example.

request.format match {

  "json" => ...

  "xml" => ...

  _ => Ok

}

:-)

Kind Regards,

--

http://about.me/marcospereira

[grandfatha]

It seems like those wishes are "make Play like Rails". But if you want
Rails, why not just use it?

[Claudiu]

good morning troll :)

RoR has some good stuff, way should not dream to use it? I write some stuff from the Rails framework just because i play with him. RoR, zend, codeigniter, does not matter for me, i think that good ideas should be present to play!

On 21 November 2011 10:39, grandfatha <dki...@googlemail.com> wrote:

It seems like those wishes are "make Play like Rails". But if you want
Rails, why not just use it?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "play-framework" group.
To post to this group, send email to play-fr...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to play-framewor...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/play-framework?hl=en.

--
Claudiu