|
|
|
|
|
|
by jegea
2036 days ago
|
|
|
Personal experience: Around 2005 I was looking for a platform for a new web app, after some years out of development but having worked extensively with NeXTstep and EOF in the 90s. After watching DHH's video and reading the Rails book, it reminded me so much of my previous experience with NeXT technology that I had no other choice but to go with Rails. The dynamism of Ruby had a lot in common with ObjC's runtime. And reading about ActiveRecord at that time I also had the feeling that its authors had worked with EOF before. All in all, NeXT built great stuff. I still own a NeXTstation Color that I got in 1992 (one of these days I should try to turn it on again). And it's a testament to the quality of that software that some pieces that I'm still running today, like Apple Mail, trace back almost directly to tools I started using back then (NeXTMail). |
|
|
I think it's because both of them were so influenced by smalltalk, more than ObjC influencing ruby necessarily. But not sure.
But I'm still very curious if AR's creators knew EOF, yeah. I haven't found DHH mentioning it; not sure if there might be forgotten other person/people central to original AR architecture.
WebObjects itself was nice in many many ways (I think it's encapsulation of form handling is far better than anything anyone's managed in Rails)... but made a fundamental mistake in trying to keep a fundamentally stateful architecture and apply it to the web by putting what was effectively an opaque state ID in every single URL. This was a basically bad design for the web (although also provided for forementioned good encapsulation of form handling. :) ).
But yeah, the sense I get in my career is that we spend a lot of time trying to reinvent something that already existed, and getting close to being as good as it... then collectively moving on to the next language/platform and doing it again. With not a lot of progress. Up to and through the 90s, it seemed like there was actual progress in software design and architecture at the high-level, the level of affordances for developers to efficiently create reliable maintainable software, but it seems to me have stalled -- perhaps in favor of huge advances in more low-level stuff, better/different languages/language paradigms, etc.