Need a compelling argument to use Django instead of Rails

[Bruno Desthuilliers]

Jaroslaw Zabiello wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:20:44 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> 
> 
>>May I suggest that you learn some Lisp dialect ?
> 
> 
> Nope. I hate Lisp syntax. 

This should not prevent you from learning it - at least, you'd then
avoid making dumb statements...

> 
>>>Of course, I you like, you can freeze every object you want and nobody can
>>>be able to open and change it. You can also trace all activity for changing
>>>something to objects because Ruby has nice system hooks implemented.
>>
>>__getattribute__ / __setattr__ / __delattr__
> 
> 
> This is not the same. Ruby can also lock access to attributes.

Please re-read the doc for these methods.

> Freezing is
> different. It can freeze any object so you will not be able to add or
> delete any method. Once freezed object cannot be unfrozen. So you can be
> sure that nobody will change you classes if you do not like.
>  
> 
>>And of course import hooks.
> 
> 
> Python?? Where?

RTFM:
http://www.python.org/doc/2.3.5/lib/built-in-funcs.html

What about learning Python instead of repeating arguments from clueless
people ?

> 
>>>Ruby
>>>has nice security system (private, protected, public scopes for methods and
>>>attributes,
>>
>>This is not "security", this is data-hiding. 
> 
> 
> No. Data hiding are in Python.

Oh, yes ? Where, exactly ?

> Ruby uses security similiar to Java. If the
> class has method marked as private it cannot be used in children classes. 

Python methods are attributes, so from a Python POV, this is still
data-hiding. But granted, I should have used "language-inforced access
restriction" instead. So let me rephrase:

This is not "security", this is language-inforced access restriction.

>>And IIRC, Ruby's attributes are always private
> 
> 
> Yes and no. Yes, because you cannot read them directly without accessors.
> And no, because you can read them if you set proper accessor.

Adding accessors doesn't make the attributes public.

> 
>>>In past Python had Bastion module (http://www.python.org/doc/lib/module-Bastion.html) 
>>>but it was rejected and now Python has nothing.
>>
>>Seems like Zope is not doing so bad...
>  
> Zope is only a great application. 

Zope is a framework and an application server.

> Invision Power Board or ezPublish are
> also great application, but it does not mean that PHP is great language. :)

You can't say that Python is dumb when it comes to security and reject
an example of a Python framework that address the problem.

> Python has no security at all. I has only convention and mangling.

Please define "security". I fail to see how language-inforced access
restriction (and mandatory declarative static typing etc) relates to
'security'. As far as I'm concerned, security is about protecting a
system from piracy, not about inflicting useless pain to programmers.

> Of
> course somebode can say, it is enough, and maybe it is. But I think, that
> this might be another reason why Java guys prefer Ruby to Python.

Agreed - but this all boil down to Ruby having a more canonical object
model than Python.

-- 
bruno desthuilliers
python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in 'onurb at xiludom.gro'.split('@')])"