What you're not getting about Ruby
-
This is my feeling too. Sure it may be more declarative or whatever as compared to C#, but I still want to see a matrix of some sort that shows different languages ( Ruby and RoR incl ) and what the advantages are...
Cheers, Simon > company:: Broken Keyboards Software > blog:: brokenkeyboards > skype :: SimonMStewart > CV :: PDF
If you want to see the matrix, take the red pill... or was it the blue one? :cool: ------------------------------------- Damian - matrix? how about a hash #
-
Scott Hanselman blogs about all the fuss over the Ruby language[^]. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Repentance The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
For UK readers the title translates as "What you're not getting about Ruby and why it's the dogs." Nick
-
Ruby looks cool. I'd love to learn it, but can't imagine when I'd ever use it. So...why bother? There are many things I can study in my free time which will prove useful to me soon. Sometimes I wish that sleep wasn't essential. I could get so much more done!!
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] FYI - Bob is a scarecrow who keeps Chuck Norris away from CodeProject.
Josh Smith wrote:
but can't imagine when I'd ever use it. So...why bother?
Well, obviously. If you don't have a use for something and you don't want to learn it for personal pleasure then don't. I use Ruby mainly because of Ruby on Rails. It is a lovely web framework and Ruby is a good language for what I want to do. C# and co. were overkill in many respects. But those are my needs. Nobody should be trying to convince you to use Ruby when C++ is better for your task at hand.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
-
Scott Hanselman blogs about all the fuss over the Ruby language[^]. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Repentance The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
I like Ruby and use it everyday. It isn't for every task though and it isn't for every programmer. Structured programmers would have a hard time changing their current good habits to fit into Ruby. Learn it if you want to or if you think it will help you in your job. It's not a religion.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
-
Scott Hanselman blogs about all the fuss over the Ruby language[^]. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Repentance The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
I would suggest that Scott hanselman reads "The language instinct" as well as anything by Chomsky because his assumptions about human language are underinformed.
'--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
This is my feeling too. Sure it may be more declarative or whatever as compared to C#, but I still want to see a matrix of some sort that shows different languages ( Ruby and RoR incl ) and what the advantages are...
Cheers, Simon > company:: Broken Keyboards Software > blog:: brokenkeyboards > skype :: SimonMStewart > CV :: PDF
SimonS wrote:
what the advantages are
This is one drum I keep beating. I have yet to see some example or hear someone give a demonstration of what Ruby or Rails brings to the table. I personally do not waste my time learning technologies just so I can say I know them. If the technology is not better than what I already have, I will not touch it. Time is far too important to waste! Oh, I watched a few demos such as "build a blog in 10 mintues". Yeah, so what, ASP.NET/C# can handle those things easily also. With all the enhancements with Linq and those to C#, I really do not see the need for something else. The only new thing I am learning lately is WPF/Silverlight and the new updates to .NET. Those I am sure I will use and not be a waste of time. If someone comes along with a better technology, I am all over it, but if I can do no more than with my current technologies, why bother...
Rocky <>< Latest Code Blog Post: Popfly! Check this out! Latest Tech Blog Post: 15 Free utilites!
-
This is my feeling too. Sure it may be more declarative or whatever as compared to C#, but I still want to see a matrix of some sort that shows different languages ( Ruby and RoR incl ) and what the advantages are...
Cheers, Simon > company:: Broken Keyboards Software > blog:: brokenkeyboards > skype :: SimonMStewart > CV :: PDF
> Sure it may be more declarative or whatever as compared to C#, but > I still want to see a matrix of some sort that shows different > languages ( Ruby and RoR incl ) and what the advantages are... This won't answer your questions, but it gives some insight into performance aspects of various languages: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ For example, it shows that Ruby is massively slow (slower than Python, Basic, Javascript and the like... actually Javascript seems to perform well), often taking hours to solve a problem which is solved by an equivalent C++ program in twenty or thirty seconds. Of course, the goal of Ruby isn't number-crunching performance, but it's still a bit of a shock to see the comparisons.
-
I like Ruby and use it everyday. It isn't for every task though and it isn't for every programmer. Structured programmers would have a hard time changing their current good habits to fit into Ruby. Learn it if you want to or if you think it will help you in your job. It's not a religion.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
I find the language quite cool, but, like any other weakly-typed language, I don't feel very "comfortable" with it.
If you truly believe you need to pick a mobile phone that "says something" about your personality, don't bother. You don't have a personality. A mental illness, maybe - but not a personality. - Charlie Brooker My Blog - My Photos - ScrewTurn Wiki
-
Scott Hanselman blogs about all the fuss over the Ruby language[^]. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Repentance The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
I am not a fan of dynamic languages, but if I was Ruby would have been my first choice.
-
I find the language quite cool, but, like any other weakly-typed language, I don't feel very "comfortable" with it.
If you truly believe you need to pick a mobile phone that "says something" about your personality, don't bother. You don't have a personality. A mental illness, maybe - but not a personality. - Charlie Brooker My Blog - My Photos - ScrewTurn Wiki
Dario Solera wrote:
I don't feel very "comfortable" with it.
Yup, exactly what the C++ and Java guys around me say when they try Ruby. They all feel afraid of using a non-strongly typed language. I've been asked "How can you programme quality without types?" and there isn't a good answer except that the code we've produced in Ruby is quality. It is as tested, as solid and reliable as their Java or C++ code. All the web guys in the building who are used to PHP, JavaScript etc. though jump into Ruby and love it.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
-
> Sure it may be more declarative or whatever as compared to C#, but > I still want to see a matrix of some sort that shows different > languages ( Ruby and RoR incl ) and what the advantages are... This won't answer your questions, but it gives some insight into performance aspects of various languages: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ For example, it shows that Ruby is massively slow (slower than Python, Basic, Javascript and the like... actually Javascript seems to perform well), often taking hours to solve a problem which is solved by an equivalent C++ program in twenty or thirty seconds. Of course, the goal of Ruby isn't number-crunching performance, but it's still a bit of a shock to see the comparisons.
destynova wrote:
"Can you manipulate the multipliers and weights to make your favourite language the best programming language in the Benchmarks Game?" :laugh: Besides, big role play compiler quality... rather then language itself.
"Throughout human history, we have been dependent on machines to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. " - Morpheus "Real men use mspaint for writing code and notepad for designing graphics." - Anna-Jayne Metcalfe
-
destynova wrote:
"Can you manipulate the multipliers and weights to make your favourite language the best programming language in the Benchmarks Game?" :laugh: Besides, big role play compiler quality... rather then language itself.
"Throughout human history, we have been dependent on machines to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. " - Morpheus "Real men use mspaint for writing code and notepad for designing graphics." - Anna-Jayne Metcalfe
> Besides, big role play compiler quality... rather then language itself. True, although it's fair to assume some correlation since one goal of compiler writing is to strive to make the most efficient compiler possible. Anyway, of course this doesn't judge how 'good' the language is - I saw some nice examples on the linked page of the expressiveness of Ruby - for example "20.minutes.ago" and things like "capture_image if @camera.on? && @camera.memory_available?"... syntactically sweet.
-
> Besides, big role play compiler quality... rather then language itself. True, although it's fair to assume some correlation since one goal of compiler writing is to strive to make the most efficient compiler possible. Anyway, of course this doesn't judge how 'good' the language is - I saw some nice examples on the linked page of the expressiveness of Ruby - for example "20.minutes.ago" and things like "capture_image if @camera.on? && @camera.memory_available?"... syntactically sweet.
destynova wrote:
Anyway, of course this doesn't judge how 'good' the language is - I saw some nice examples on the linked page of the expressiveness of Ruby - for example "20.minutes.ago" and things like "capture_image if @camera.on? && @camera.memory_available?"... syntactically sweet.
Exactly. Every language has its strengths (sp?) and weaknesses. :)
"Throughout human history, we have been dependent on machines to survive. Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony. " - Morpheus "Real men use mspaint for writing code and notepad for designing graphics." - Anna-Jayne Metcalfe
-
Dario Solera wrote:
I don't feel very "comfortable" with it.
Yup, exactly what the C++ and Java guys around me say when they try Ruby. They all feel afraid of using a non-strongly typed language. I've been asked "How can you programme quality without types?" and there isn't a good answer except that the code we've produced in Ruby is quality. It is as tested, as solid and reliable as their Java or C++ code. All the web guys in the building who are used to PHP, JavaScript etc. though jump into Ruby and love it.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
Paul Watson wrote:
They all feel afraid of using a non-strongly typed language
You probably mean dynamically typed.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
-
Paul Watson wrote:
They all feel afraid of using a non-strongly typed language
You probably mean dynamically typed.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
Ah no, the Java and C++ guys feel afraid of using a language that is not strongly-typed. i.e. Ruby is not strongly-typed. But I've seen half a dozen different ways of describing the same type systems so it doesn't really matter.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
-
Ah no, the Java and C++ guys feel afraid of using a language that is not strongly-typed. i.e. Ruby is not strongly-typed. But I've seen half a dozen different ways of describing the same type systems so it doesn't really matter.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
Paul Watson wrote:
Ah no, the Java and C++ guys feel afraid of using a language that is not strongly-typed.
Than again the Java guys tell the C++ guys the need to manually manipulate memory is not always necessary. :) Though context (i.e. domain/application/business needs) is really important in these types of discussions (unless they have some sort of phobia and can't stand being around dynamically typed languages)
Paul Watson wrote:
i.e. Ruby is not strongly-typed.
Ruby is usually considered strongly typed... It's closer to Java than JavaScript in that respect.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
-
Paul Watson wrote:
Ah no, the Java and C++ guys feel afraid of using a language that is not strongly-typed.
Than again the Java guys tell the C++ guys the need to manually manipulate memory is not always necessary. :) Though context (i.e. domain/application/business needs) is really important in these types of discussions (unless they have some sort of phobia and can't stand being around dynamically typed languages)
Paul Watson wrote:
i.e. Ruby is not strongly-typed.
Ruby is usually considered strongly typed... It's closer to Java than JavaScript in that respect.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
A.A. wrote:
Ruby is usually considered strongly typed
Usually in some circles and usually not in others. The Java guys here refuse to accept that Ruby is strongly typed and in my way of thinking I agree with them. Ruby in my head is dynamically typed or runtime typed. Frankly though you can call it Cat In The Hat typed for all I care. The language works well in my domain. (not saying you said it didn't :) )
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
-
A.A. wrote:
Ruby is usually considered strongly typed
Usually in some circles and usually not in others. The Java guys here refuse to accept that Ruby is strongly typed and in my way of thinking I agree with them. Ruby in my head is dynamically typed or runtime typed. Frankly though you can call it Cat In The Hat typed for all I care. The language works well in my domain. (not saying you said it didn't :) )
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
Paul Watson wrote:
Usually in some circles and usually not in others. The Java guys here refuse to accept that Ruby is strongly typed and in my way of thinking I agree with them. Ruby in my head is dynamically typed or runtime typed.
Maybe they don't really see the difference between Strongly/Weakly typed vs Statically/Dynamically typed... There is a big Difference.
Paul Watson wrote:
Frankly though you can call it Cat In The Hat typed for all I care. The language works well in my domain. (not saying you said it didn't )
:cool:
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
-
If you want to see the matrix, take the red pill... or was it the blue one? :cool: ------------------------------------- Damian - matrix? how about a hash #
lolololol. thats too good
-
Scott Hanselman blogs about all the fuss over the Ruby language[^]. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Repentance The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
What am I not getting from Ruby... many.. Can it be used on 3D Simulator project without tricky tricks, speed kill, and memory bloat? Ruby and all 'virtual machined' language is a no-no for that kind of project.:~ So what I am not getting in Ruby is.. manual memory management. For Web Apps ruby is more than great..;P
-- God will not change people fate until they change it themselves --