<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for DHH</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/ed9635566b34ade32274f510f0f9a6d2/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 11:43:46 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: J2EE Web Frameworks</title><link>http://davidcrow.disqus.com/j2ee_web_frameworks/#comment-21174434</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;amp;#039;m sad to hear that Ruby on Rails is out of the race merely because the IT gatekeepers haven&amp;amp;#039;t heard of it. What exactly were their reasoning for shuning Ruby? Couldn&amp;amp;#039;t they get it to compile? Didn&amp;amp;#039;t they even want to try?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br&gt;  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br&gt;  Hopefully, you&amp;amp;#039;ll dig deeper for an answer. Maintaining the status que due to ignorance is a terrible way work.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DHH</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2004 01:46:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Ruby on Rails</title><link>http://davidcrow.disqus.com/ruby_on_rails/#comment-21174425</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;amp;#039;ve found that most clients only have a superficial interest in the technology chosen for a solution when &amp;amp;quot;all other things are not being equal&amp;amp;quot;. If you&amp;amp;#039;re able to demonstrate extreme rapid development many clients would rather have &amp;amp;quot;productivity over standards&amp;amp;quot;.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DHH</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:38:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twitter off the Rails? And, so what?</title><link>http://philcrissman.disqus.com/twitter_off_the_rails_and_so_what_30/#comment-9805182</link><description>We certainly don't run a special version of Rails at 37signals. That wouldn't make any sense. The whole point of open-sourcing Rails was to participate in the shared commons. Running our own fork isn't very compatible or sensible for that.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DHH</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 10:13:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: CRUD, REST, DDD, Rails - these are a few of my favorite things</title><link>http://thinkinginsideabiggerbox.disqus.com/crud_rest_ddd_rails_these_are_a_few_of_my_favorite_things/#comment-1797896</link><description>Thanks for the kind words. DDD is indeed one of my favorite programming books. Lots of inspiration from Mr. Evans.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DHH</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 01:08:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Francis Hwang: On fixtures and first-time testers</title><link>http://fhwang.disqus.com/francis_hwang_on_fixtures_and_first_time_testers/#comment-6115991</link><description>You seem to be missing the point of fixtures. If all you're doing is setting up a single fixture, with a single value, for a single test case, well, duh, of course they're not worth it. If, on the other hand, you're setting up an entire slate of fixtures that have relations, like creating an entire, valid account in Basecamp with all the child objects that go with that, it's absolutely worth it in my opinion.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I still use fixtures for current and new projects. I'm aware that there are other ways to get test data, yet I still choose to use fixtures. So of course they're not a lie. How can we be lying about things that we actually use?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You don't like fixtures. Good for you.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DHH</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 11:43:46 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>