atom feed7 messages in org.ruby-lang.ruby-talkRe: Quick self-intro/comment II (WebO...
FromSent OnAttachments
dhtappAug 17, 2003 9:39 pm 
Gavin SinclairAug 17, 2003 9:51 pm 
Chad FowlerAug 18, 2003 4:38 am 
Gavin SinclairAug 18, 2003 5:29 am 
Avi BryantAug 18, 2003 1:01 pm 
dhtappAug 18, 2003 3:02 pm 
Kirk HainesOct 9, 2003 10:53 am 
Subject:Re: Quick self-intro/comment II (WebObjects)
From:Avi Bryant (av@beta4.com)
Date:Aug 18, 2003 1:01:53 pm
List:org.ruby-lang.ruby-talk

Gavin Sinclair <gsin@soyabean.com.au> wrote:

Funny, IOWA makes no mention of WebObjects in any of the docs I looked at, whereas CGIKit mentions it up front.

Intrigued, I downloaded IOWA to have a look, but the example pages didn't come up :(

The design of IOWA was indeed heavily inspired by WebObjects; it's also a dead project, and it doesn't at all surprise me that it doesn't work with recent versions of Ruby.

My work on IOWA jumped environments to Squeak Smalltalk almost two years ago, and became "Seaside". (More recently, small parts of Seaside have been ported back to Ruby as "borges", though not the parts you would recognize as WOF-like). My philosophy of web app development has also diverged a lot from WO since I wrote IOWA - most notably, I don't use the template/bindings idea anymore, preferring to specify templates programmatically and link them to the model with callbacks (blocks). I've also extended the subcomponent model to be quite a bit more powerful, leaning much further towards composition (vs inheritance) than typical WO apps do.

My standard recommendation to those interested in IOWA (which must get awfully tiresome on a Ruby list) is to learn Smalltalk and use Seaside - it has an extra couple of years of development thrown into it, about 100 more users than IOWA ever had, and 10 or so more commercial projects under its belt. I don't think many people have taken me up on this, however. ;)

Cheers, Avi