<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rails: When an Uninitialized Constant Hits the Vent</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/</link>
	<description>Am I a finished product -- or a work in progress?</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:26:45 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/comment-page-1/#comment-48449</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:46:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/#comment-48449</guid>
		<description>Thanks, I had a similar problem. 

I often need to specify the root class (leading '::' thing), so I'm happy with that. But, a couple of my controllers had the leading '::' specified in my routes file. There was no good reason for this, it didn't cause any problems on the dev server - but did cause intermittent "unitialized constant" errors on the production server.

The fix was to remove the leading :: in the config/routes.rb file. 

Again, I had similar sub-class hierarchies which seem to be conflicting, depending on when things were loaded.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, I had a similar problem. </p>
<p>I often need to specify the root class (leading &#8216;::&#8217; thing), so I&#8217;m happy with that. But, a couple of my controllers had the leading &#8216;::&#8217; specified in my routes file. There was no good reason for this, it didn&#8217;t cause any problems on the dev server - but did cause intermittent &#8220;unitialized constant&#8221; errors on the production server.</p>
<p>The fix was to remove the leading :: in the config/routes.rb file. </p>
<p>Again, I had similar sub-class hierarchies which seem to be conflicting, depending on when things were loaded.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aleksey Gureev</title>
		<link>http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/comment-page-1/#comment-47424</link>
		<dc:creator>Aleksey Gureev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/#comment-47424</guid>
		<description>Correct. I tried to start with Grails / Groovy several times, but each time it looked more like a kludge to me or an effort to reproduce what Rails already has. It looks like the developers who are bound to use Java in their organizations look for the way to make it as Rails as possible.

Personally, I don't see any reason to step on my throat and force myself into using these frameworks if I can do Rails. I mean, why? Just to be on the Java side or because I spent more than 7 years programming on it? I'm not bound by corporate obligations and regulations, and I choose whatever works best for me and aids my freelancing business -- that's the essence of being pragmatic programmer, by the way.

I don't value my past achievements as much as I do the opportunities. If new approaches and technologies overpass the past, it makes it even better and far more fun.

Downloading your presentation on Grails now to see your position better...

Thanks for the comment!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correct. I tried to start with Grails / Groovy several times, but each time it looked more like a kludge to me or an effort to reproduce what Rails already has. It looks like the developers who are bound to use Java in their organizations look for the way to make it as Rails as possible.</p>
<p>Personally, I don&#8217;t see any reason to step on my throat and force myself into using these frameworks if I can do Rails. I mean, why? Just to be on the Java side or because I spent more than 7 years programming on it? I&#8217;m not bound by corporate obligations and regulations, and I choose whatever works best for me and aids my freelancing business &#8212; that&#8217;s the essence of being pragmatic programmer, by the way.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t value my past achievements as much as I do the opportunities. If new approaches and technologies overpass the past, it makes it even better and far more fun.</p>
<p>Downloading your presentation on Grails now to see your position better&#8230;</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dashin</title>
		<link>http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/comment-page-1/#comment-47423</link>
		<dc:creator>dashin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.noizeramp.com/2008/01/29/rails-when-an-uninitialized-constant-hits-the-vent/#comment-47423</guid>
		<description>Hi, Alexey!

As I can see you've faced with RoR much later than with Java, so the Grails framewok could be interesting for you because it has RoR ideology, and you can stil use your Java code with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Alexey!</p>
<p>As I can see you&#8217;ve faced with RoR much later than with Java, so the Grails framewok could be interesting for you because it has RoR ideology, and you can stil use your Java code with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
