From Cake to Rails

Now that I have finished a large project in Ruby on Rails, I think it's time to document some of my thoughts on how it compares to CakePHP. I'm in the unique position of having built the exact same application twice, once in CakePHP and now once in Rails. My findings were that Rails is superior in most aspects, but a lot of this has to do with the superiority of the Ruby programming language over PHP.

As I mentioned in a previous blog post, coming from a PHP background makes the Ruby syntax a bit difficult to pick up at first, despite its intent to mimic the structure of natural language. Once you get over the initial mental hurdles, however, Ruby is an absolute pleasure to work with and makes you realize all the things that are less than ideal about PHP. Ruby is much easier to write and to read. It's succinct, isn't littered with braces and semicolons, and it's very flexible. In Ruby, "everything is an object," and this fact leads to some very elegant and compact code. I also love the ability to chain methods together in object.method1.method2.method3 format. It's easy to follow and does in single lines what often takes PHP a whole section of code. Closures are a concept fairly fundamental to Ruby that current PHP developers may have trouble learning, but with the introduction of closures in PHP 5.3, this conceptual roadblock will likely prove less of an issue as time goes on.

The object-orientation of Ruby makes Rails significantly easier to work with than CakePHP because all your model data are encapsulated in objects, whereas CakePHP simulates objects by passing nested arrays around. Anyone who has dealt with nested arrays in PHP can tell you: they get ugly very fast. The complexity of a model object in Rails never impacts the syntax needed to represent it. It's always easy to write and easy to read.

One example of a significant advantage Rails has over CakePHP is the way it handles associations. In CakePHP, the only built-in model association for handling many-to-many relationships is "has and belongs to many." This requires a join table in the database that keeps track of pairings between records in each of the two relating tables. For example, when I was working on the tagging system for the blog in CakePHP, I was using the HABTM association. Posts had many Tags and Tags had many Posts. The difficulty arises in performing actions on one model from the point of view of the other. There are many examples in the CakePHP documentation of how to save related model data from a form, but I found it extremely difficult to edit existing relationships, such as when I wanted to associate a new blog post with a tag that already existed. While I did come to a solution eventually, it was not by any means intuitive and certainly didn't work out of the box. I had to use some third-party model behaviors which felt like they should have been built in from the start.

Rails has a much more elegant solution to these relationships called "has many through." Has many through connects two tables with a third join table just like HABTM, but with has many through, the two main tables are made aware of each other through an extra association. So in the posts/tags example, Posts and Tags both have many Taggings (the join table), but Posts has many Tags through Taggings, and Tags have many Posts through Taggings. This allows you to access one model via the other directly like this:

@post = Post.last
puts @post.tags
# frameworks, rails, testing, etc.

Very simple and intuitive. Much easier to manage and to build forms for.

There are some things I prefer about CakePHP, however. One thing I prefer is the way Cake handles validation and forms. I found the out-of-the-box form helpers in Rails to be difficult to use and to tweak to my liking. While Rails does provide advanced customization for building forms by creating your own "form builders" and by overriding the built in form classes, CakePHP's forms are much more customizable and intuitive. They don't force you to use a specific layout for your forms and error messages without resorting to writing complex customized classes or other behind-the-scenes hacks.

Somewhat related, I also found the validation handling in Rails to be inferior to Cake's, primarily for one reason: error messages do not persist through requests. The common way of dealing with a form in Rails is to render the form view directly from the controller action processing it when invalid data is received rather than doing a redirect. What this means is that the form-processing action must recreate any setup steps needed to render that view that were already taken care of by the original action.

For example, here on, the blog and screencast views have a comment form at the bottom. These are handled by the show action (called the "view" action in CakePHP terminology). When a comment is submitted, however, it is processed by the create action, which is in charge of, unsurprisingly, creating new comments. But what happens if some of the data submitted in the comment is invalid? In CakePHP, the model sets validation error messages and redirects you to the original page. In Rails, the create action renders the show action directly with no redirect. This means that all the data set up initially done by the show action, such as fetching the current blog post and any other associated comments, must be done again from the create action. Since the error messages don't persist through requests, you can't simply redirect to the original page because the errors will disappear. This particular example is also made worse by the fact that the page that displays the comment form and the action that processes the submitted data are in two different controllers. Because no redirection is happening, this requires the comment controller to take on behavior from the blog and screencast controllers that really feel hacked together and ugly.

Another complexity of using Rails that CakePHP does not suffer from is deployment. For now, deploying a Rails application is not nearly as easy as a PHP application. Deploying a CakePHP app only requires you to set up the database on the server and upload your files. With Rails, there is some configuration required that has a bit of an initial learning curve. In addition, support for Rails applications may not even be present in some situations such as when using shared hosting. Once you've fought your way through the initial setup and deployment, things go back to being easy. Capistrano is a tool commonly used to automate application deployment using a version control repository. This deployment strategy could be seen as a plus for Rails, however, as it encourages you to integrate your project tightly with version control (which you really should be doing anyway).

What I think it boils down to, if I were to give another developer advice on which to choose, is that it really depends on your situation. If you have any technical restrictions that prevent you from using Rails, obviously it's out. If you only know PHP and need to turn out a project quickly, it's probably not worth diving into Rails for it. But if time permits and you're willing to put some effort into learning Ruby and a new way of doing things, I think the benefit to using Rails is very significant.

CakePHP certainly can't be faulted for the shortcomings of PHP when compared to Ruby. CakePHP is a fantastic framework and I will certainly continue to use it for any projects I do that need to be in PHP. But if I'm not restricted to using PHP by the constraints of a particular project, I see no reason to choose it over Rails at this point.


Joachim Joachim commented
September 21, 2009

Thanks for the comparison.
In my opinion, the V of the MVC in Rails is it's weakest part. Looking back I think dealing with the view helpers took me the same time to learn as the whole rest.
I had a hard time to remember their syntax ;-)
While ActiveRecord is so intuitively usable and the Controllers with their filters are straight and effective, dealing with forms really could be better.
Writing customized form generators helps but in relationship to the love AR gets, forms are really discriminated ;-)
Concerning deployment, you're right, this is a big disadvantage even more in a mental way. But passenger solves that !

Thank's again for the interesting write-up

Tim Almond Tim Almond commented
September 21, 2009

The simple killer reason for me using CakePHP over Rails is deployment. With Rails, I would have to specify the hosting, with PHP as long as they've got anything but the very worst hosting, I know it will deploy.

Jose Diaz-Gonzalez Jose Diaz-Gonzalez commented
September 21, 2009

You can simulate Post hasMany Tag through Tagging using the following:

var $hasAndBelongsToMany = array("Tag" => array("with" => "Tagging"));

Debuggable has a Post on it at

Adding pre-existing tags to posts is extremely simple, although I find adding new tags to new posts AS WELL as pre-existing tags to be a bit complex. I'd likely use the Lookupable Behavior in conjunction with some simple regex parsing of text input to simulate something like that.

I agree that some things should be in the core, or should be similar, but from what I've seen, lots of things are being remedied in CakePHP 1.3. Rails 3.0 is also looking pretty good, although I have a similar complaint for Rails Helpers, and they don't seem to be changing fundamentally :(

Kip Kip commented
September 21, 2009

You can do a redirect instead of a render, but just store the information you need in the session (or even use the "flash" variable to just store it for the next request).

Jimmy Cuadra Jimmy Cuadra commented
September 21, 2009

@Jose - Thanks for the Debuggable link! I don't recall seeing that before and it will be very helpful. It's also worth noting that the CakePHP experiences I talk about in this post were already a year ago, and as you say, a lot of improvements are being made for 1.3 and beyond.

@Kip - I thought of using session/flash variables to persist the data, actually. I found some posts on various forums where similar issues were asked about and the general consensus was not to do that. I don't recall the reasoning for it, though. Probably worth looking into, but I think the point remains: CakePHP handles this situation without altering the default behavior of the form submission/validation process.

Victor Victor commented
September 22, 2009

Very interesting article.
I think I missed one detail. It is good habit not only show user error after unsuccesful submit but to fill form areas with data entered by user. In the Rails we can do it by using same object during form creation. How it is implemented in Cake? Store all values in session?

I agree about Rails helpers. Even after several years on Rails they are still 'mindbreaking tool' for me.

Deploying a CakePHP app only requires you to set up the database on the server and upload your files.
I don't agree with it. In this case you are talking about most easy case of CakePHP deployment and compare it with iterative and complex Rails deployment. Lets put both frameworks on the same level.

If we are talking about simple case. Then Rails project will be deployed in the following way:
1) git clone
2) rake gems:install
3) rake db:migrate
4) configuring your webserver
5) configuring cron tasks
6) ...
In absolutely same way you will copy *.php files to the hosting, install needed libraries like Imagemagick, upload and run SQL-dumps and edit crontab.

If we are talking about complex case then for iterative DB, source code and configuration update in PHP projects you will need tool similar to Capistrano if you don't like to do it manually again and again.

McNaz McNaz commented
September 22, 2009

Very good comparison article.

I have to disagree on the deployment issue, however.

My experience of deploying PHP apps was always tempered with anxiety as the mechanism was very manual; upload via ftp, check permissions, check permissions, check permissions, update database (if required)... etc.... These sessions were always reserved for late at night to minimise downtime (which there always was).

Rails deployment, OTOH, is simple awesome! The only learning curve required is a few hours to write your Capistrano deployment recipe and after that.... never look back. To deploy: cap production|staging deploy|deploy_with_migrations.

This works even better with mod_rails as Apache doesn't even need to be reload (or restarted if you are running mod_watch).

hariharan kumar hariharan kumar commented
September 22, 2009

Flash[:notice] like $this->Session->setFlash is there in rails. cakephp should mature by supporting only php5. providing downgrade support for PHP4 means you are killing people not to upgrade to PHP5. PHP5 is the minimum fairly standard with OOPS feature. Objects to array conversion doesnt works and debars the object nature. people say when compared to rails,django scales well. one frank thing is when cakephp takes one leap, rails will go ahead of ten leap and will conquer the world.

Chris Herring Chris Herring commented
September 24, 2009

If you can't deploy a rails app using capistrano I am glad I don't have to work with you.