All Quiet on the Western Front: Is Rails overshadowing Ruby?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Trans, Apr 16, 2005.

  1. Trans

    Trans Guest

    Perhaps I have a skewed perspective (it happens :), but it seems as if
    the ruby-talk mailing list has become rather "calm" in recent months.
    While Ruby-core appears to have a bit of activity, much of it seems a
    response to the stillness on talk. And alternate Ruby lists seem to
    have fallen largely silent, with one expection: Rails. So I wonder, is
    Ruby at risk of becoming little more than a subset techonolgy of Rails?

    T.
     
    Trans, Apr 16, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Trans

    Pat Maddox Guest

    Ruby can't be a subset technology of Rails, simply because Rails is a
    subset of Ruby :)

    For my purposes, using Ruby outside of Rails just isn't necessary. My
    shop only develops web applications, so it would make sense that Rails
    gets far more use, at least from us. We don't use PHP to write
    command line apps either.

    Ruby's a nice language, but I think it's particularly well suited for
    web development. I can't say I see anything wrong with the direction
    it seems to be taking.



    On 4/16/05, Trans <> wrote:
    > Perhaps I have a skewed perspective (it happens :), but it seems as if
    > the ruby-talk mailing list has become rather "calm" in recent months.
    > While Ruby-core appears to have a bit of activity, much of it seems a
    > response to the stillness on talk. And alternate Ruby lists seem to
    > have fallen largely silent, with one expection: Rails. So I wonder, is
    > Ruby at risk of becoming little more than a subset techonolgy of Rails?
    >
    > T.
    >
    >
     
    Pat Maddox, Apr 16, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Hi --

    On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Trans wrote:

    > Perhaps I have a skewed perspective (it happens :), but it seems as if
    > the ruby-talk mailing list has become rather "calm" in recent months.


    Please -- don't jinx us, just enjoy it :)


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David A. Black, Apr 16, 2005
    #3
  4. Trans

    Jim Freeze Guest

    * Pat Maddox <> [2005-04-17 05:21:52 +0900]:

    > Ruby's a nice language, but I think it's particularly well suited for

    ---------------------------------
    > web development. I can't say I see anything wrong with the direction

    ---------------

    I've seen others make this same comment. I find it interesting
    that at RubyConf 2001 (the first Ruby conference) I heard multiple
    times that Ruby was not ready for web development.

    I know rails is new, but I'm not sure that the language has made
    any significant changes to justify such an about face in opinion.

    However, I think it is a lesson in how people can take
    their own opinion (or a common opinion) and believe in it as fact.

    Rails has opened the eyes of to many to what they could not see.
    David and his RubyOnRails is to Ruby what Michaelangelo and
    Michaelangelo's David are to a large of stone.

    The only difference is that Ruby has more value than a large rock. :)

    It is also clear that some people just see the statue.
    But me, I see the process. I am waiting to see what gets
    created when another Michaelangelo comes along and finds Ruby.

    --
    Jim Freeze
    Code Red. Code Ruby
     
    Jim Freeze, Apr 16, 2005
    #4
  5. Trans

    Pat Maddox Guest

    On 4/16/05, Jim Freeze <> wrote:
    > * Pat Maddox <> [2005-04-17 05:21:52 +0900]:
    >
    > > Ruby's a nice language, but I think it's particularly well suited for

    > ---------------------------------
    > > web development. I can't say I see anything wrong with the direction

    > ---------------
    >
    > I've seen others make this same comment. I find it interesting
    > that at RubyConf 2001 (the first Ruby conference) I heard multiple
    > times that Ruby was not ready for web development.


    That was four years ago. Certainly things can change enough in that
    time to make Ruby a serious consideration for web development.



    > I know rails is new, but I'm not sure that the language has made
    > any significant changes to justify such an about face in opinion.


    Languages don't need to make significant changes to gain usefulness.
    Language maturity comes with the development of new libraries and
    frameworks, and it's these libraries and frameworks that add value to
    the language itself, and further the popularity. And as a language
    becomes more popular, new libs and frameworks get developed, and it
    goes around and around until everyone loves it :)

    That's what Rails has done in the area of web development. Ruby
    itself isn't well-suited for web development - the fact that there's a
    very nice framework for web apps adds that value. We all know that
    you can write web apps in any language. There's just no point when
    other languages provide effective mechanisms for doing so.


    > However, I think it is a lesson in how people can take
    > their own opinion (or a common opinion) and believe in it as fact.


    My opinion comes from writing web applications for 7 years now, using
    C and Perl CGIs, PHP, Java, and ASP. Again, the usefulness of each
    language increases with the emergence of development frameworks, and I
    find that Rails is by far the simplest and most effective. That is,
    however, just my opinion.


    > Rails has opened the eyes of to many to what they could not see.
    > David and his RubyOnRails is to Ruby what Michaelangelo and
    > Michaelangelo's David are to a large of stone.
    >
    > The only difference is that Ruby has more value than a large rock. :)
    >
    > It is also clear that some people just see the statue.
    > But me, I see the process. I am waiting to see what gets
    > created when another Michaelangelo comes along and finds Ruby.


    I have no doubt that more people will come along and add value to
    Ruby. It really is a nice language, and I think we'll see that people
    will want to incorporate it into other areas of development. As that
    happens, new frameworks will be developed, and we'll see it increase
    in popularity in areas besides the web.
     
    Pat Maddox, Apr 16, 2005
    #5
  6. Trans

    James Britt Guest

    Jim Freeze wrote:

    > David and his RubyOnRails is to Ruby what Michaelangelo and
    > Michaelangelo's David are to a large of stone.


    That is the funniest thing I've read all week.



    James
     
    James Britt, Apr 16, 2005
    #6
  7. Hello Trans,

    T> Perhaps I have a skewed perspective (it happens :), but it seems as if
    T> the ruby-talk mailing list has become rather "calm" in recent months.
    T> While Ruby-core appears to have a bit of activity, much of it seems a
    T> response to the stillness on talk. And alternate Ruby lists seem to
    T> have fallen largely silent, with one expection: Rails. So I wonder, is
    T> Ruby at risk of becoming little more than a subset techonolgy of Rails?

    No, we need a good "plone" clone, then we can use this list for
    talking about this subset of Rails technology.


    --
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
     
    Lothar Scholz, Apr 16, 2005
    #7
  8. Trans

    James Britt Guest

    Trans wrote:
    > Perhaps I have a skewed perspective (it happens :), but it seems as if
    > the ruby-talk mailing list has become rather "calm" in recent months.


    Really? There seems to me to be steady increase in traffic on ruby-talk.

    > While Ruby-core appears to have a bit of activity, much of it seems a
    > response to the stillness on talk. And alternate Ruby lists seem to
    > have fallen largely silent, with one expection: Rails.


    Well, there's steady discussion on the Nitro/Og list, but ruby-musings
    does seem quite.

    > So I wonder, is
    > Ruby at risk of becoming little more than a subset techonolgy of
    > Rails?


    There may be some chance of Ruby "Strutsification", where increasing
    numbers of people are familiar with a specific API or tool but have
    little understanding of the underlying technology.

    That may be good news for people looking for work customizing or fixing
    up Rails sites when needs outgrow basic skills. (Or it may be mixed
    news: lots of Ruby jobs, but you'll be required to use Rails even when
    there are better Ruby options.)

    Some of the Rails fanboy behavior may put a few people off Ruby in
    general, though I expect that over time the intrinsic value of the
    language itself will outshine any particular application.

    (I suppose, of course, we'll be having the same discussion when the next
    generation of Ruby application framework makes a splash. The more, the
    merrier.)


    James
     
    James Britt, Apr 16, 2005
    #8
  9. T wrote:

    > Perhaps I have a skewed perspective (it happens :), but it
    > seems as if the ruby-talk mailing list has become rather
    > "calm" in recent months.
    > While Ruby-core appears to have a bit of activity, much of it
    > seems a response to the stillness on talk. And alternate Ruby
    > lists seem to have fallen largely silent, with one expection:
    > Rails. So I wonder, is Ruby at risk of becoming little more
    > than a subset techonolgy of Rails?


    I feel my perspective is skewed too, as I have only been using a subset of
    Rails (ActiveRecord).

    I stumbled across Ruby when I was looking for Windows-friendly scripting
    languages in which to use the COM-based ORM layer that I was developing.
    Then I discovered ActiveRecord which was practically a prototype of what I
    was working on. A couple of hours of coding later (spread very thinly
    between other work) and I'd written a few extensions to AR that made it into
    exactly what I wanted.

    Now I'm using Ruby to prototype other parts of my application stack. It's a
    brilliant language.

    The web isn't the only platform that people write software for.

    Adelle.
     
    Adelle Hartley, Apr 17, 2005
    #9
  10. Trans

    Joao Pedrosa Guest

    Hi,

    > The web isn't the only platform that people write software for.


    Agreed!

    Ruby rocks soooooooo much. It's a pity that the most used languages
    suck in comparison to Ruby. Matz is a genius. Ruby is the most
    precious gem of the world.

    To me, Ruby is "The Matrix" or "The Matrix" is Ruby... hehehe.

    Ruby makes OO work, not the other way around...

    A code in Ruby is almost alive. It's like playing "The Sims" with code
    in Ruby. :)

    If Ruby is a programming language, I don't know how to call the
    others... Maybe almost useless programming languages? :) Maybe dead
    programming languages? :)

    People want to tame this beast called Ruby, but Ruby has been made to
    be free... Please, let it be free and live it's own life.

    Cheers,
    Joao
     
    Joao Pedrosa, Apr 17, 2005
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jeff
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    547
    Thomas Weidenfeller
    Jan 19, 2004
  2. Vidur Dhanda
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    368
    Vidur Dhanda
    Feb 19, 2005
  3. www.westerncartooncards.ca

    Exchange Links < Western Cartoon Cards > Exchange Links

    www.westerncartooncards.ca, Jul 12, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,261
    Toby Inkster
    Jul 12, 2004
  4. =?iso-8859-1?q?Mirco_M=FCller?=

    job-opening in western germany for software developer

    =?iso-8859-1?q?Mirco_M=FCller?=, Sep 13, 2003, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    360
    Thomas Matthews
    Sep 13, 2003
  5. Replies:
    7
    Views:
    461
    Jukka K. Korpela
    Jun 15, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page