> i like play more than I like grails tbh, because it doesn't want to be the rails of java. yes people compare it to one another, but that's just the familiarity effect.
My memory might be playing tricks on me, but I remember play developers talking about rails being a huge influence.
If Play isn't rails for Java, how else one does a Rails for Java? The "familiarity effect" is there because Play is modeled after Rails.
> now, where's the computationally intensive stuff? nowhere to be found. it's a web api. where's the computationally intensive stuff in twitter? I don't know, but chances are theres a native extension for that nowadays.
Search, for one is computationally intensive. I am pretty sure there are more which the outside world doesn't know about.
> There actually was a time when you simply could not build a scalable system in ruby without too many hoops,
What scale are we talking about? At Twitter scale, ruby or anything else has to jump hoops. For example, network load from users coming online and offline on FB chat will break out of box solutions.
My memory might be playing tricks on me, but I remember play developers talking about rails being a huge influence.
If Play isn't rails for Java, how else one does a Rails for Java? The "familiarity effect" is there because Play is modeled after Rails.
> now, where's the computationally intensive stuff? nowhere to be found. it's a web api. where's the computationally intensive stuff in twitter? I don't know, but chances are theres a native extension for that nowadays.
Search, for one is computationally intensive. I am pretty sure there are more which the outside world doesn't know about.
> There actually was a time when you simply could not build a scalable system in ruby without too many hoops,
What scale are we talking about? At Twitter scale, ruby or anything else has to jump hoops. For example, network load from users coming online and offline on FB chat will break out of box solutions.