I have a Rails task: should I use script/runner or

Question

For ad hoc Rails tasks we have a few implementation alternatives, chief among which would seem to be:

script/runner some_useful_thing

and:

rake some:other_useful_thing

Which option should I prefer? If there's a clear favourite then when, if ever, should I consider using the other? If never, then why would you suppose it's still present in the framework without deprecation warnings?

Answer 1

The difference between them is that script/runner boots Rails whereas a Rake task doesn't unless you tell it to by making the task depend on :environment, like this:

task :some_useful_task => :environment do
  # do some useful task
end

Since booting Rails is expensive, it might be worth skipping if you can avoid it.

Other than that, they are roughly equivalent. I use both, but lately I've used script/runner executing a script separately more.

Answer 2

Passing parameters to a rake task is a pain in the butt, to say the least. You either need to resort to environment variables or a very hackish parameter system that is not intuitive and has lots of caveats.

If your task needs to handle command line arguments gracefully then writing a script is the way to go.

Luke Francl mentions script/runner booting up Rails. That's true. But if you don't want to boot up rails then just run the script as is without script/runner. So the only real difference between scripts and rake tasks are their aesthetics. Choose whatever feels right to you.

I use rake tasks for little tasks (one or two lines). Anything more complicated goes into the script/ directory. I'll break this rule if I think other developers will expect the code to live in one place over another.