How neat, Matz linked to my article about fixing architecture flaws in ActiveRecord.

Of course I was curious to see what he said, so I ran his comments through online translators from Babelfish, Google and Dictionary.com. Based on past experiences, I wasn’t expecting much.

Updated on Sept. 30, 2007. Sam was kind enough to send me his real translation – so take a look at this first:

It says that ActiveRecord’s faults are with the way it handles text-based column types and the fact that serialized objects get mixed with text from the database in a hash table.

I’m not in a position to make decisions but pointing out such flaws and making suggestions for improvement is very constructive.

Personally, I think the biggest flaw with Rails is its “self-centeredness”. Rails is changing Ruby itself at a rapid pace so when you try to do similar things with other libraries and frameworks you quickly run into a brick wall. When everyone tries to do the same thing you usually get tragic results so I am understanding of how all the “black magic” of redefining core classes is delegated to ActiveSupport.

Well, flaws in Rails are also related to flaws within Ruby itself so I’d like to address that in some way with Ruby 2.0.

And now the automated translations, which were awful. And remarkably similar – they all must be using the same translation engine. Take a look:

Babelfish:

As for the fault of ActiveRecord the text and the object which the Syrian rise from the database is done blending, is in treatment and attribute hash of text based column type when. It cannot judge in me, but as for indication of fault and proposition of improvement you think that it is very healthy. Privately as for the largest fault of Rails, you think that there is a “self central characteristic”. In other words, because Rails changes the Ruby very thing with rather enormous spirit, it tries to do kind of that the other library either the framework or are similar with directly it collides. Well, when everyone does similar thing, because it means mostly miserable thing, it seems that rewrites fundamental class as for the “black magic” leaving to ActiveSupport, the bucket, with is the attitude which can understand also the fact that you say, but. As for fault of ま and this Rails being the case that that way it is consequence of the weak point of Ruby, with Ruby 2.0, somehow we would like to cope with here.

Google:

As for the fault of ActiveRecord the text and the object which the Syrian rise from the database is done blending, is in treatment and attribute hash of text based column type when.

It cannot judge in me, but as for indication of fault and proposition of improvement you think that it is very healthy.

Privately as for the largest fault of Rails, you think that there is a “self central characteristic”. In other words, because Rails changes the Ruby very thing with rather enormous spirit, it tries to do kind of that the other library either the framework or are similar with directly it collides. Well, when everyone does similar thing, because it means mostly miserable thing, it seems that rewrites fundamental class as for the “black magic” leaving to ActiveSupport, the bucket, with is the attitude which can understand also the fact that you say, but.

As for fault of [ma] and this Rails being the case that that way it is consequence of the weak point of Ruby, with Ruby 2.0, somehow we would like to cope with here.

Dictionary.com:

As for the fault of ActiveRecord the text and the object which the Syrian rise from the database is done blending, is in treatment and attribute hash of text based column type when.

It cannot judge in me, but as for indication of fault and proposition of improvement you think that it is very healthy.

Privately as for the largest fault of Rails, you think that there is a “self central characteristic”. In other words, because Rails changes the Ruby very thing with rather enormous spirit, it tries to do kind of that the other library either the framework or are similar with directly it collides. Well, when everyone does similar thing, because it means mostly miserable thing, it seems that rewrites fundamental class as for the “black magic” leaving to ActiveSupport, the bucket, with is the attitude which can understand also the fact that you say, but.

As for fault of [ma] and this Rails being the case that way it is consequence of the weak point of Ruby, with Ruby 2.0, somehow we would like to cope with here.

So much for enlightenment.