Consider the 4 main alternatives to Ruby on Rails. The most powerful Ruby framework.
Short Description: Sinatra is a little framework. If you initially accept this as truth then you’ll have the opportunity to enjoy working with it. This framework actively promotes the old truth: “if you want to do something well, do it yourself.” In real terms, this means the absence of the MVC model. Sinatra is mainly engaged in processing requests on the server side and to great feats categorically not inclined.
In terms of minimizing and increasing productivity, Sinatra is a great tool. But to solve complex and complex tasks it is better to screw it to Rails.
Additional positives are the lightness, speed, stability, extensibility. Most importantly the understanding what you do and what the machine does.
Functionality rating: 1 rail of 5.
Brief description: one more framework, sharpened exclusively for API development. It supports the REST architecture which makes it quite suitable for many web products. In particular the namespace, group, segment, etc. structures are used for this.
This is a higher-level framework than Sinatra but the advantages compared to Rails are similar: faster performance, greater stability and not used a bunch of middleware.
Another positive is simplicity and speed.
Functionality rating: 2 rails of 5.
Brief description: it’s enough to talk about narrowly framed frameworks. Time to move on to the full implementation of the MVC-model. It was created as a full-fledged competitor to Rails as the developers tried to make it more compact and easier to handle.
On Hanami, you can quickly create a web application (the manufacturer promises to keep within 5 minutes) it consumes 60% less memory than any other fullstack-framework on Ruby and it has a number of interesting useful features. Separate testing of interaction logic or working with controller actions as with separate classes, help in the work and increase the safety of the final product.
You’ll enjoy the compactness and simplicity of fullstack-development as well.
Functionality rating: 4 rails out of 5.
Brief Description: A web-based framework based on Sinatra and the server interface Rack is also a fullstack-development tool. It carries the same values as its “Hollywood” core, so comparing it is more appropriate not so much with Rails as with Hanami.
When getting to know Padrino, you “grab” and Sinatra. Other advantages: ease of use, speed of development and operation of the application, a fairly rich ecosystem. Perhaps, this is the most likely second number in the world of Ruby frameworks.
Notice the lightness, compactness, speed, as well as simultaneous study of 3 popular Ruby tools in one go.
Functionality rating: 4 rails out of 5.
We return to the topic Rails and look into the history. Without the appearance of this framework, Ruby would not have found half the support that it has today. The overwhelming majority of people still like to buy ready-made houses on cultivated land not wanting to go into details of laying networks or how this house was built. Ruby on Rails – the same house. The purchase of which has a lot of pluses and a few minuses. But there are always those who with much more pleasure will acquire land, agree on the construction plan and will independently select materials for their new home. Eim materials and plans – the rest of Ruby-frameworks: a space for creativity the realization of one’s own desires, ambitions an occasion for pride for a lifetime.
According to the above selection, we can conclude that in the world of Ruby there are Rails and all the rest. This is true, but this does not cancel the fact that there were many attempts to encroach on the throne. Here are a few more:
Merb was once such a glorious competitor in Rails. Then the developers decided that they are not enemies to each other, but colleagues. As a result, they teamed up with the “rails” and created Ruby 3.
Camping is a micro-framework. The source code of which fits on one sheet of A4 format. It implements the CGI interface but the functionality is incredibly low.
NYNY is similar to Sinatra web framework and is responsible for the development of the kernel. The plus is the ability to interact with Rails and all the same Sinatra, using Rack as an interface.
Scorched is another incredibly lightweight framework based on the principle of DRY. Not too popular due to the almost complete duplication of Sinatra on the functionality.
Cuba is an elegant attempt to create a framework for developing real-time applications with clean code and the minimum possible number of files involved.
Hobbit – the creators planned to expand the capabilities of Rack to a full-fledged framework. A good attempt, eventually frustrated about frustration and laziness of the developers.