

DHH's response to "7 reasons I switched back to PHP after 2 years on Rails" - brett
http://loudthinking.com/posts/13-thinking-about-the-big-rewrite

======
jamesbritt
The CDBaby rewrite was well-known in the Rails community.

However, I don't recall anyone in that community telling him that it might not
be such a good idea.

Anyways, compare Derek's current observations with this:
[http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2005/01/cd_baby_rewrit...](http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2005/01/cd_baby_rewrite_in_postgres_an.html)

and

[http://www.oreillynet.com/ruby/blog/2005/11/migrating_to_rub...](http://www.oreillynet.com/ruby/blog/2005/11/migrating_to_ruby_on_rails_and.html)

------
matstc
the original post was not very pertinent anyway, as far as ruby/rails is
concerned. All 7 reasons have almost nothing to do with ruby/rails:

#1 - "is there anything rails/ruby can do that php can't do? ... (thinking)...
no."

#2 - our entire company's stuff was in php: don't underestimate integration

#3 - don't want what i don't need

#4 - it's small and fast

#5 - it's built to my tastes

#6 - i love sql

#7 - programming languages are like girlfriends: the new one is better because
_you_ are better

~~~
neilk
He lost me at #1. Technically, there's so many things Rails and Ruby can do
that PHP can't. If he means it pragmatically (they're both data/web connect-o-
thingies), then he has a point.

~~~
Jd
<<So many things Rails and Ruby can do that PHP can't>>

Meta-programming? What else? Do you mean the language or accompanying
libraries?

------
nickb
Why editorialize the title?!

~~~
brett
Really? That bad? Why not? I like editorialized titles, and without the
editorial DHH's post is essentially a linkjack to something fairly old.

I toned it down. Is that better?

