Frameworks

[flebber]

On Oct 20, 12:32 am, "Diez B. Roggisch" <de... at nospam.web.de> wrote:
> > web2py is interesting the author appears to be implying(I could be
> > misunderstanding this) that the web2py db ORM is equal to if not
> > superior to SQLAlchemy - From
> >http://www.web2py.com/AlterEgo/default/show/150
>
> I don't read that out of the post, and it almost certainly is wrong, at
> least on a general level. There isn't much above SQLAlchemy regarding
> flexibility & power, so while simple cases might be simpler with other
> ORMs, they often make more complicated ones impossible.
>
> But again, I don't think that's the claim there.
>
> Diez

That sounds fair.

Bruno posted earlier

> >Django : very strong integration, excellent documentation and support,
>huge community, really easy to get started with. And possibly a bit more
>mature and stable...

>Pylons : more loosely coupled (imply: less integration), based on
>"standard" components - which is both a blessing and a curse, specially
>wrt/ documentation -, requires a good knowledge of Python and the HTTP
>protocol to get started with. Very powerful and flexible but this comes
>with a price...

>Now both are written by talented programmers, and both are pretty good
>tools. I guess it's more a matter of personal preferences and/or
>external constraints (PHB etc...) than anything else.

>A couple other "lightweight" candidates you migh want to consider are
>werkzeug and web.py:

>http://werkzeug.pocoo.org/
>http://webpy.org/

In short it seems to me that Django and Web2py include more "magic" in
assisting oneself to create you web/application, whilst Pylons and
Werkzueg leave more control in the users hands hopefully leading to
greater expression and power.

Pylons recommends SQLALchemy and Mako (offers Genshi and Jinja2) and
Werkzueg SQLAlchemy and Jinja2. As I don't have the experience to tell
the pro's cons of these two apart, would choosing Pylons based on
Documentation be a fair call?