Give up RJS and go pure

Posted by Dr Nic on November 17, 2006

RJS seems like a nice idea. Its Ruby with embedded Javascript.

Now put away the crayons and get back to pure Javascript with embedded Ruby with “MinusR” - RJS minus the R (for Ruby).

This is especially useful if you want a clean way to support non-Prototype/Scriptaculous frameworks, like jQuery. You can call the raw Javascript for these libraries, and embed your Ruby objects using Erb and a handy js helper to convert Ruby to JSON.

Its clean, healthy fun. Like carrots.

Makes me think about jogging, its just that healthy for you.

Trackbacks

Use this link to trackback from your own site.

Comments

Leave a response

  1. Chris Fri, 17 Nov 2006 21:24:45 UTC

    I’m in.

  2. Rodney Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:00:53 UTC

    Most of the time rjs just confuses me. This has my vote. Much directer/clearer.

  3. Dr Nic Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:39:16 UTC

    Yeah, I just found RJS was a 3rd programming language of sorts. I knew Ruby, I knew Javascript, and now I needed to know RJS. If you’ve got to look up the Prototype/Scriptaculous libraries anyway to know what you can do and want classes/methods to call, may as well express it in JS.

    I might change my mind in time, but I think I’ll use MinusR for awhile.

  4. zerohalo Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:01:15 UTC

    Is it possible to give an example?

  5. zerohalo Sat, 18 Nov 2006 21:27:10 UTC

    Sorry, never mind, found it on Dan’s site.

  6. [...] (Found via Dr. Nic Williams) [...]

  7. Richard White Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:23:53 UTC

    I very much agree. Hmmm should AjaxScaffold move to use MinusR instead or would that just be a maintenance nightmare?

  8. Dr Nic Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:31:42 UTC

    @richard - pragmatically - if its already working now, I don’t see significant benefits. Plus, for AjaxScaffold - a generator - there aren’t enough unit tests (last time I looked) to let you refactor with confidence.

Comments