I'm doing a course on Rails that focuses on version 1.1.6 so I'm trying to figure out which of the numerous changes between 1.x and 2.x are the most critical to be aware of for practical use. At the moment I don't need to know all the little nitty gritty changes - just the big ones.
views:
85answers:
3
+2
Q:
Of the changes to Rails between 1.x and 2.x which ones have actually affected your work in Rails?
+2
A:
well, most of them have, but the biggest thing from the 1.x to the 2.x codebase would probably be the emphasis and features for REST
also, I don't believe there ever was a 1.6 version. I believe they were only 1.2.x versions
cpjolicoeur
2009-05-05 17:27:31
Indeed there's no rails 1.6, but the rails libraries like activerecord had their own distinct version numbering during the 1.x releases, and I believe some of them reached 1.6.
kch
2009-05-05 17:35:27
You're right. I corrected my question - I meant 1.1.6.
pez_dispenser
2009-05-05 17:42:27
+2
A:
Here's the best summary I remember from back then.
If you're willing to part with some paltry cash, the pdf book linked in that post is also great. I ended up buying it for the better format. (Don't expect great typography though)
kch
2009-05-05 17:38:16
+3
A:
There's nothing that's can't-live-without critical, but there's a heap of wouldn't-want-to-live-without-it stuff.
OTTOMH:
- The built-in RESTfulness.
- named_scope
- improved finders
- no more
t.columnin migrations (t.[typename] is so much DRYer) - the little improvements to test syntax in
ActiveSupport::TestCase - way better caching
Mike Woodhouse
2009-05-05 19:25:22
i18n isn't an issue for me right now, but it's nice to know it's there. default_scope is something I've yet to experience: it's going to be some time before I get to 2.3...
Mike Woodhouse
2009-05-05 22:43:00