My company, CodeGear (the Borland spin-off) has a survey open on Ruby and Ruby on Rails. If you have two minutes we'd appreciate your input on this survey.
The survey is at: href="http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp? u=187863298831
Thanks in advance Joe
Of course I fat-fingered the URL, it should be: http:// www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=187863298831
Joe
Joe at CodeGear wrote:
My company, CodeGear (the Borland spin-off) has a survey open on Ruby and Ruby on Rails. If you have two minutes we'd appreciate your input on this survey.
The survey is at: href="http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp? u=187863298831
Briefly: Yes you should develop a Rails editor, and if it thinks outside the box as much as Rails itself does, it could blow other editors away.
For example, most Rails development consists of adding a little to a view, adding a little to a controller, then adding a little to a model. So most editors follow the Rails directory format, and put the models up here, the controllers all the way over there, and so on. The ability to navigate smartly amongst stuff, without treating it as separate files, would be priceless.
However, question 14 lists common problems with Rails development, and you forgot to mention automated testing, or refactoring, in the list. No editor should make that oversight.
Thanks Philip, your comments are right on target.
Speaking of testing, does anyone use zentest, selenium, watr or other tools in addition to (or instead of) the Rails functional tests?
Joe at CodeGear wrote:
Speaking of testing, does anyone use zentest, selenium, watr or other tools in addition to (or instead of) the Rails functional tests?
I use a Wiki I wrote, via pure Ajax, that tests target pages in a little IFrame.
Your test button should check-point every file's state each time the tests get a green bar. Then you should Diff and Revert to that check- point on command.
And all the tests should run out of one, unshifted, keystroke. The editor should remain available and unblocked during the run.