« Return to Thread: Is the rails 2.0 scaffold system philosophically ( not technically? ) broken?

Re: Is the rails 2.0 scaffold system philosophically ( not technically? ) broken?

by Marnen Laibow-Koser-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View in Thread


Jeremy McAnally wrote:
> Scaffolds != Rails
>

No, but the simplicity of the Rails 1.x scaffold is what 'sold' Rails to
a lot of people (e.g. via the famous DHH Blog app video on the Rails
site). Personally, I think it would have been nice to have kept the
'backwards compatibility' intact so that newcomers would have ready
access to all the Rails 1.0 tutorials available rather than trying to
follow those tutorials and immediately running up against the buffers,
so to speak... ;-)

best wishes
Huw

http://www.sapphiresteel.com
Ruby In Steel for Visual Studio
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

 « Return to Thread: Is the rails 2.0 scaffold system philosophically ( not technically? ) broken?