TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

PylonsHQ - Blog - Pylons 1.0 Released

80 点作者 brolewis将近 15 年前

3 条评论

stevenwei将近 15 年前
Congrats, it has been quite a while since their last release.<p>A short comparison to Django:<p>- SQLAlchemy is badass.<p>- Jinja2 (or whatever templating language you like) is also badass.<p>- Passing data to your templates using a global 'c' object is <i>weird</i> and seems rather hack-ish to me.<p>- None of the third party form libraries are as good as Django's forms, especially when it comes to ModelForms (FormAlchemy's API is rather lacking, IMO). WTForms is the best I've seen so far, but it's lacking model integration.<p>- Both of the major user auth systems (AuthKit and repoze.who/repoze.what) are lacking compared to Django's contrib.auth. I found them convoluted, somewhat overengineered, and difficult to set up. Doing authentication in the middleware layer is the wrong approach, IMO. You shouldn't have to shuffle user data and login state around using redirects, query strings, and environment variables. If you search around on this topic, a lot of people end up recommending rolling your own. Blargh.<p>- Pylons puts a lot of cruft in your project when you create an new project. I'm not convinced how much of this stuff is actually necessary, especially at the beginning of a project.<p>- The docs have tended to lag behind the actual releases. For example, at one point url_for() was deprecated in favor of url(), but a lot of the docs still referenced it and it was not obvious where to find the documentation for url(). In fact, it's still not obvious. Sometimes you see TODOs in the documentation itself that make you wonder how up to date the docs actually are. Hopefully this has improved since I last used it.<p>My biggest issue with Pylons is when you run into needing a third party library like forms or user auth, you have to spend time researching 2342 different libraries, only to discover that many of them have fallen into disuse, or are poorly documented. On the other hand, it's great when it lets you choose well written components like SQLAlchemy and Jinja2.<p>Django and Pylons both have their pluses and minuses, but I think there is still a lot of room for improvement in the Python web world. Armin Ronacher seems to be making lots of progress with Flask, maybe we'll see that grow into a bigger project.
评论 #1389164 未加载
akavlie将近 15 年前
One thing going for Pylons: Great documentation. If you're using TurboGears 2.0, you'll do far better going straight to Pylons docs than most of the stuff on turbogears.org.<p>Still though, it seems that most people tend to go for the full-stack frameworks. Anyone here using Pylons?
评论 #1387410 未加载
评论 #1387290 未加载
评论 #1387925 未加载
评论 #1387832 未加载
评论 #1387696 未加载
评论 #1387817 未加载
phreeza将近 15 年前
1080 lines sounds quite sleek, but then I suspect it just sources almost everything out to other packages.<p>Could someone who has used it comment on how it compares to Django?
评论 #1387259 未加载
评论 #1387725 未加载