How's ruby compare to it older brother python

Discussion in 'Python' started by Hunn E. Balsiche, Apr 26, 2004.

  1. in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and their
    development progress. I have not use python but heard about it quite often;
    and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing serious application,
    e.g web application as it has not many features in it yet.

    I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest language
    to learn. How about PHP?

    Thanks
     
    Hunn E. Balsiche, Apr 26, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hunn E. Balsiche

    Michael Guest


    >in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and their
    >development progress. I have not use python but heard about it quite often;
    >and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing serious application,
    >e.g web application as it has not many features in it yet.
    >
    >I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest language
    >to learn. How about PHP?
    >

    IMO Ruby is closer to Perl than Python as far as clearness of it's
    syntax. I really like Python better. PHP isn't as garbled as Perl but it
    isn't as flexible either and it's still not nearly as clean as Python.
    Of the four languages (Perl, Python, PHP, and Ruby) I find Python the
    easiest to work in. I use Python for command-line programming, web
    programming (mod_python), and GUI programming (wxPython and Pygame) and
    find it a good general purpose language.
     
    Michael, Apr 26, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Hunn E. Balsiche

    Peter Maas Guest

    Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:
    > I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest language
    > to learn. How about PHP?


    http://www.python.org/doc/Comparisons.html

    Mit freundlichen Gruessen,

    Peter Maas

    --
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Maas, M+R Infosysteme, D-52070 Aachen, Hubert-Wienen-Str. 24
    Tel +49-241-93878-0 Fax +49-241-93878-20 eMail
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Peter Maas, Apr 26, 2004
    #3
  4. Hunn E. Balsiche

    Peter Maas Guest

    Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:
    > I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest language
    > to learn. How about PHP?


    I forgot http://dada.perl.it/shootout, which is great for performance
    comparisons. Source code of the tests can be viewed easily to get a
    feeling for the strengths and weaknesses of the syntax as well.

    Mit freundlichen Gruessen,

    Peter Maas

    --
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Maas, M+R Infosysteme, D-52070 Aachen, Hubert-Wienen-Str. 24
    Tel +49-241-93878-0 Fax +49-241-93878-20 eMail
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Peter Maas, Apr 26, 2004
    #4
  5. Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:

    > in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and
    > their development progress. I have not use python but heard about it
    > quite often; and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing
    > serious application, e.g web application as it has not many features
    > in it yet.
    >
    > I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest
    > language to learn. How about PHP?


    It really depends on what you'll want to do. PHP is a great language for
    getting dynamic HTML pages up and running quickly. Perl is great for
    its string-handling abilities. (On my Web pages, I actually call a Perl
    script from PHP precisely for this reason.)

    However, both PHP and Perl can be very unwieldy for large projects. I'm
    a newcomer to Python, but it seems to scale much better than the other
    P-languages.

    For a first tour of Python, I'll suggest that you read the excellent
    tutorial by the language's author, Guido van Rossum:

    http://www.python.org/doc/current/tut/

    regards,
    --
    Leif Biberg Kristensen
    http://solumslekt.org/
    Validare necesse est
     
    Leif B. Kristensen, Apr 26, 2004
    #5
  6. Hunn E. Balsiche

    John Roth Guest

    "Hunn E. Balsiche" <> wrote in message
    news:c6ich0$c5mee$-berlin.de...
    > in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and their
    > development progress. I have not use python but heard about it quite

    often;
    > and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing serious

    application,
    > e.g web application as it has not many features in it yet.


    As another poster has mentioned, Ruby is more closely related
    to Perl than to Python. While I don't use it, people I respect who
    have moved to Ruby say it has a couple of real killer features;
    in particular the way blocks and the pervasive use of the visitor
    pattern come together change the way one writes programs for
    the better.

    As far as syntax is concerned, there doesn't seem to be a
    huge amount of difference. Syntax is syntax, and every language
    has it's little pecularities.

    I haven't seen enough of it to make me want to learn it, but it's
    on my list of languages to play with sometime.

    John Roth

    > Thanks
    >
    >
     
    John Roth, Apr 26, 2004
    #6
  7. Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:
    > in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and their
    > development progress. I have not use python but heard about it quite often;
    > and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing serious application,
    > e.g web application as it has not many features in it yet.


    Syntax : both Ruby and Python are pretty clean, Ruby being IMHO more
    consistent and Python easier to grasp

    OO : Ruby is OO all the way, and pretty close to Smalltalk. Python is
    more a mix of procedural and OO with some functional stuff too.

    Web : Python may have a bit more existing solutions, and a real killer
    app (Zope). Now, AFAIK, Ruby has also some interesting stuff for web
    developpement.

    IMHO, both are really great languages. I really like the elegance of
    Ruby and the ease of use of Python. So try both and pick the one that
    fits you're brain !-)

    > I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest language
    > to learn.


    No comment...

    > How about PHP?

    <troll>
    One of the dumbest 'scripting' language I've ever worked with, but still
    a good solution for web developpement when you have no better (read :
    Python or Ruby) choice.
    </troll>

    Bruno
     
    Bruno Desthuilliers, Apr 26, 2004
    #7
  8. Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    In article <iL3jc.232$>,
    Leif B. Kristensen <> wrote:
    .
    .
    .
    >getting dynamic HTML pages up and running quickly. Perl is great for
    >its string-handling abilities. (On my Web pages, I actually call a Perl
    >script from PHP precisely for this reason.)

    .
    .
    .
    I hear this more often than I understand it. Perl certainly
    does support many string-oriented operations. What's a speci-
    fic example, though, of an action you feel more comfortable
    coding in external Perl? I suspect there's something I need
    to learn about PHP's deficiencies, or Perl's power.
    --

    Cameron Laird <>
    Business: http://www.Phaseit.net
     
    Cameron Laird, Apr 26, 2004
    #8
  9. Re: Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    Cameron Laird rose and spake:

    > In article <iL3jc.232$>,
    > Leif B. Kristensen <> wrote:
    > .
    >>getting dynamic HTML pages up and running quickly. Perl is great for
    >>its string-handling abilities. (On my Web pages, I actually call a
    >>Perl script from PHP precisely for this reason.)

    > .
    > I hear this more often than I understand it. Perl certainly
    > does support many string-oriented operations. What's a speci-
    > fic example, though, of an action you feel more comfortable
    > coding in external Perl? I suspect there's something I need
    > to learn about PHP's deficiencies, or Perl's power.


    I'm glad that you asked :)

    The routine is for a phonetic search in Norwegian 18th century names,
    which can be spelled in an amazing number of different ways. As I found
    that the Soundex algorithm was useless for Norwegian spellings, I
    invented my own. It's not really an algorithm, but a series of
    substitutions that reduces names to a kind of primitives. Thus, eg.
    Berthe, Birthe, Bergitte, Bergit, Birgit, Børte, Berit, and Brit, which
    actually are interchangeable spellings of the same name, are reduced to
    BRT.

    Here's a small sample:

    $str =~ s/HN/N/g; # John --> JON
    $str =~ s/TH/T/g; # Thor --> TOR
    $str =~ s/CHI/KJ/g; # Torchild --> TORKJL
    $str =~ s/CHE/KJ/g; # Michel --> MKJL
    $str =~ s/KKE/KJ/g; # Mikkel --> MKJL
    $str =~ s/KIEL/KJL/g; # Kield -> Kjeld ( --> KJL)
    $str =~ s/CH/K/g; # Christen -> Kristen ( --> KRSTN)
    $str =~ s/CA/KA/g; # Carl -> Karl ( --> KAL)
    $str =~ s/RL/L/g; # Thorleif <=> Tollef <=> Tolf ( --> TOLF)

    I use a Perl script to transform my genealogy data from a FoxPro
    database to MySQL command scripts. Thanks to the excellent module
    DBD::XBase by Jan Pazdziora, this is a quite simple task.

    In theory, the web routine for phonetic searches might have been
    implemented in PHP. The trouble with that is that I would have to
    maintain both a PHP and a Perl version of the same routine. I find it
    much easier to just copy and paste the whole mess (at present about 120
    lines) between the encoding and the decoding routines in Perl, and run
    an exec("perl norphon.pl $name") from PHP.

    regards,
    --
    Leif Biberg Kristensen
    http://solumslekt.org/
    Validare necesse est
     
    Leif B. Kristensen, Apr 26, 2004
    #9
  10. Hunn E. Balsiche

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <>,
    John Roth <> wrote:
    >
    >"Hunn E. Balsiche" <> wrote in message
    >news:c6ich0$c5mee$-berlin.de...
    >> in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and their
    >> development progress. I have not use python but heard about it quite

    >often;
    >> and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing serious

    >application,
    >> e.g web application as it has not many features in it yet.

    >
    >As another poster has mentioned, Ruby is more closely related
    >to Perl than to Python. While I don't use it, people I respect who
    >have moved to Ruby say it has a couple of real killer features;
    >in particular the way blocks and the pervasive use of the visitor
    >pattern come together change the way one writes programs for
    >the better.
    >
    >As far as syntax is concerned, there doesn't seem to be a
    >huge amount of difference. Syntax is syntax, and every language
    >has it's little pecularities.


    Well, there is one big difference syntactically: Python uses indentation
    as syntax and Ruby doesn't. Personally I don't prefer Python's
    'indentation-as-syntax' since it means that syntactically significant
    pieces of my code are invisible and if the tab settings in my editor are
    not the same as yours it can make it difficult to share code (or even
    worse, it might look like everything is OK when we share code, but the
    code which looks exactly the same to each of us, might not be depending
    on how tabs are or are not expanded). It would also seem to be a pain for
    cutting & pasting code as well.
    However, some people really like Python's indentation-as-syntax, so YMMV.

    Your best bet is to actually use each language for a small project
    so that you spend about a day with each language. You'll find that while
    on the surface both languages seem quite similar, at a deeper level they
    each have a very different effect on how you think about and approach the
    problem. Some people find that Ruby best fits with their brain and others find
    Python a better fit. You won't know until you try.

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Apr 26, 2004
    #10
  11. Re: Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    In article <knbjc.267$>,
    Leif B. Kristensen <> wrote:
    .
    .
    .
    >which can be spelled in an amazing number of different ways. As I found
    >that the Soundex algorithm was useless for Norwegian spellings, I
    >invented my own. It's not really an algorithm, but a series of
    >substitutions that reduces names to a kind of primitives. Thus, eg.

    .
    .
    .
    "Canonicalization" is one name in academic English for this transformation.
    --

    Cameron Laird <>
    Business: http://www.Phaseit.net
     
    Cameron Laird, Apr 26, 2004
    #11
  12. Hunn E. Balsiche

    Roy Smith Guest

    Re: Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    In article <>,
    (Cameron Laird) wrote:

    > In article <knbjc.267$>,
    > Leif B. Kristensen <> wrote:
    > .
    > .
    > .
    > >which can be spelled in an amazing number of different ways. As I found
    > >that the Soundex algorithm was useless for Norwegian spellings, I
    > >invented my own. It's not really an algorithm, but a series of
    > >substitutions that reduces names to a kind of primitives. Thus, eg.

    > .
    > .
    > .
    > "Canonicalization" is one name in academic English for this transformation.


    But is it the cannonical name?
     
    Roy Smith, Apr 26, 2004
    #12
  13. Re: Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    In article <knbjc.267$>,
    Leif B. Kristensen <> wrote:
    .
    .
    .
    >The routine is for a phonetic search in Norwegian 18th century names,
    >which can be spelled in an amazing number of different ways. As I found
    >that the Soundex algorithm was useless for Norwegian spellings, I
    >invented my own. It's not really an algorithm, but a series of
    >substitutions that reduces names to a kind of primitives. Thus, eg.
    >Berthe, Birthe, Bergitte, Bergit, Birgit, Børte, Berit, and Brit, which
    >actually are interchangeable spellings of the same name, are reduced to
    >BRT.
    >
    >Here's a small sample:
    >
    >$str =~ s/HN/N/g; # John --> JON
    >$str =~ s/TH/T/g; # Thor --> TOR
    >$str =~ s/CHI/KJ/g; # Torchild --> TORKJL
    >$str =~ s/CHE/KJ/g; # Michel --> MKJL
    >$str =~ s/KKE/KJ/g; # Mikkel --> MKJL
    >$str =~ s/KIEL/KJL/g; # Kield -> Kjeld ( --> KJL)
    >$str =~ s/CH/K/g; # Christen -> Kristen ( --> KRSTN)
    >$str =~ s/CA/KA/g; # Carl -> Karl ( --> KAL)
    >$str =~ s/RL/L/g; # Thorleif <=> Tollef <=> Tolf ( --> TOLF)
    >
    >I use a Perl script to transform my genealogy data from a FoxPro
    >database to MySQL command scripts. Thanks to the excellent module
    >DBD::XBase by Jan Pazdziora, this is a quite simple task.
    >
    >In theory, the web routine for phonetic searches might have been
    >implemented in PHP. The trouble with that is that I would have to
    >maintain both a PHP and a Perl version of the same routine. I find it
    >much easier to just copy and paste the whole mess (at present about 120
    >lines) between the encoding and the decoding routines in Perl, and run
    >an exec("perl norphon.pl $name") from PHP.

    .
    .
    .
    Long ago, I was myself involved in a tiny way with
    parish records for Finnmark and Troms. I wish I'd
    been able to do more ...

    I'm glad things are working for you. I'm all for
    not-duplicating effort. Do you realize you can use
    PHP from the command line? As I understand your
    explanation, it doesn't reflect AT ALL on a defici-
    ency in PHP string-handling; to my eye, PHP can do
    the operation just about as well as Perl.

    Incidentally, Tcl has a one-liner for this, along
    the lines of
    set str [string map {HN N TH T CHI KJ CHE KJ ...} $str]
    I believe Perl does, too, but haven't enough interest
    to track it down now. I'm also confident we can find
    a language which makes the particular operation even
    more transparent.

    I continue to conclude that all these languages are
    roughtly equally competent at managing strings.
    --

    Cameron Laird <>
    Business: http://www.Phaseit.net
     
    Cameron Laird, Apr 26, 2004
    #13
  14. In article <>,
    Phil Tomson <> wrote:
    .
    .
    .
    >Your best bet is to actually use each language for a small project
    >so that you spend about a day with each language. You'll find that while
    >on the surface both languages seem quite similar, at a deeper level they
    >each have a very different effect on how you think about and approach the
    >problem. Some people find that Ruby best fits with their brain and others find
    >Python a better fit. You won't know until you try.

    .
    .
    .
    It's not just that "You won't know until you try" ("is it better
    to have children, or join the monastery?"); it's that you won't
    know until you try, *and it's inexpensive to try*! It's eminently
    feasible to gain experience in either language with a few hours (!)
    of work, as opposed to the weeks that must precede enlightenment
    about, say, J2EE servers.
    --

    Cameron Laird <>
    Business: http://www.Phaseit.net
     
    Cameron Laird, Apr 26, 2004
    #14
  15. Hunn E. Balsiche

    John Roth Guest

    "Phil Tomson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > John Roth <> wrote:
    > >
    > >"Hunn E. Balsiche" <> wrote in message
    > >news:c6ich0$c5mee$-berlin.de...
    > >> in term of its OO features, syntax consistencies, ease of use, and

    their
    > >> development progress. I have not use python but heard about it quite

    > >often;
    > >> and ruby, is it mature enough to be use for developing serious

    > >application,
    > >> e.g web application as it has not many features in it yet.

    > >
    > >As another poster has mentioned, Ruby is more closely related
    > >to Perl than to Python. While I don't use it, people I respect who
    > >have moved to Ruby say it has a couple of real killer features;
    > >in particular the way blocks and the pervasive use of the visitor
    > >pattern come together change the way one writes programs for
    > >the better.
    > >
    > >As far as syntax is concerned, there doesn't seem to be a
    > >huge amount of difference. Syntax is syntax, and every language
    > >has it's little pecularities.

    >
    > Well, there is one big difference syntactically: Python uses indentation
    > as syntax and Ruby doesn't. Personally I don't prefer Python's
    > 'indentation-as-syntax' since it means that syntactically significant
    > pieces of my code are invisible and if the tab settings in my editor are
    > not the same as yours it can make it difficult to share code (or even
    > worse, it might look like everything is OK when we share code, but the
    > code which looks exactly the same to each of us, might not be depending
    > on how tabs are or are not expanded). It would also seem to be a pain for
    > cutting & pasting code as well.


    As I said in another post, indentation is the reason I learned
    Python in the first place, but it's not the reason I stay with
    the language. In fact, I've come to the very heretical view
    that the indentation sensitivity is a language design mistake.
    It should be the editor's job to handle that level of detail in
    a manner that the developer finds workable.

    One reason I think it's a language design mistake is that
    it's not recursive. That is, it's not possible to shift from
    expression level indentation back to statement level
    indentation without major disruptions. This is needed for
    embedded blocks.

    I think Ruby has a reasonable middle ground here: its use of
    'end' is fairly unobtrusive compared to, for example, C, C++,
    C# or Java. Even so, I think that a reasonable programming
    editor would get them out of my face while I was programming.

    The tab issue is one of those relatively inconsequential things
    that people seem to love to argue about: I'd rather be able to
    tell the editor how I want the program formatted, and have done
    with it.

    > Phil
     
    John Roth, Apr 26, 2004
    #15
  16. Re: Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    Cameron Laird rose and spake:

    > Long ago, I was myself involved in a tiny way with
    > parish records for Finnmark and Troms. I wish I'd
    > been able to do more ...


    That's very interesting from my point of view. Starting this autumn, by
    the way, the Norwegian National Archive will begin to publish scanned
    images of parish records on the Web. They plan to finish this job in a
    couple of years, and then go on to other popular sources for
    genealogists, such as probates, court records, and land transactions.

    > I'm glad things are working for you. I'm all for
    > not-duplicating effort. Do you realize you can use
    > PHP from the command line? As I understand your
    > explanation, it doesn't reflect AT ALL on a defici-
    > ency in PHP string-handling; to my eye, PHP can do
    > the operation just about as well as Perl.


    It probably could, but at the time I wrote my FoxPro extraction script I
    was very much into Perl. I was very happy to find the XBase module, and
    besides, I have been unable to find something similar in any other
    language that I have more than a nodding aquaintance with.

    > I continue to conclude that all these languages are
    > roughtly equally competent at managing strings.


    Perhaps, but right now I think that I'm in love with Python. Consider
    these two equivalent routines in PHP and Python:

    PHP:
    function get_place($x) {
    $query = "select pl1, pl2, pl3, pl4, pl5
    from places where place_id = $x";
    $handle = mysql_query($query);
    $row = mysql_fetch_row($handle);
    $pl_string = '';
    if ($p_num == 1) return '';
    $i = 0;
    for ($j = 0; $j<5; $j++) {
    if ($row[$j] != '' && substr($row[$j], 0, 1) != '-') {
    $pl[$i] = $row[$j];
    $i++;
    }
    }
    for ($j = 0; $j < ($i-1); $j++)
    $pl_string .= $pl[$j].', ';
    $pl_string .= $pl[$i-1];
    return ltrim(rtrim($pl_string));
    }

    Python:
    def get_place(x):
    c=db.cursor()
    c.execute("select pl1, pl2, pl3, pl4, pl5
    from place where place_id = %d" % (x))
    result=c.fetchone()
    return ', '.join([p for p in result if p and p[0] != '-'])

    Consider that my entire Web site is written in PHP. I stumbled across
    Python just a few weeks ago, and got substantial help with the latter
    version of the routine from Paul Rubin on this list.

    My PHP coding may be suboptimal, but in terms both of codability and
    readability as well as in sheer elegance, I find the Python version
    superior in any way.

    regards,
    --
    Leif Biberg Kristensen
    http://solumslekt.org/
    Validare necesse est
     
    Leif B. Kristensen, Apr 26, 2004
    #16
  17. Re: Is Perl *that* good? (was: How's ruby compare to it older brother python)

    In article <gxcjc.321$>,
    Leif B. Kristensen <> wrote:
    >Cameron Laird rose and spake:

    .
    .
    .
    >> I continue to conclude that all these languages are
    >> roughtly equally competent at managing strings.

    >
    >Perhaps, but right now I think that I'm in love with Python. Consider
    >these two equivalent routines in PHP and Python:

    .
    [marvelous, if
    slightly unfair,
    example]
    .
    .
    >My PHP coding may be suboptimal, but in terms both of codability and
    >readability as well as in sheer elegance, I find the Python version
    >superior in any way.

    .
    .
    .
    I consider infatuation with Python entirely healthy. In
    fact, I often *do* argue just the same position as you
    take here: that Python is strongly and demonstrably superior
    to PHP. I just want to be as precise as I can about what the
    differences are.
    --

    Cameron Laird <>
    Business: http://www.Phaseit.net
     
    Cameron Laird, Apr 26, 2004
    #17
  18. Cameron Laird wrote:
    > .
    > It's not just that "You won't know until you try" ("is it better
    > to have children, or join the monastery?"); it's that you won't
    > know until you try, *and it's inexpensive to try*! It's eminently
    > feasible to gain experience in either language with a few hours (!)
    > of work, as opposed to the weeks that must precede enlightenment
    > about, say, J2EE servers.


    Of course, those of us who are more into the Complete Waste Of Time [TM]
    theory of selecting software components will simply give you the bottom
    line:

    - If you like Perl, you'll like Ruby. If you think Perl is a bletcherous
    hack, you'll like Python.
    - The Python community dwarfs the Ruby community.
    - Both languages are slow.
    - Python has lotsa libraries but not everything. Ask here regarding your
    specific needs. Even if Python were the most elegant language in the world,
    that's not useful if you must write everything from scratch and don't have
    time to do it.

    This is the kind of information you get by simply asking people and reading
    lotsa archives. Some people say "Try it yourself!" is the only way to
    learn. They are wrong, and they often don't value people's time. You
    really can rely on other people's reported experiences of the nuclear
    mushroom cloud exploding over the horizon. It is not strictly necessary to
    walk into Ground Zero yourself.

    Now, if you're going to argue "it's just a little Ruby code..." why don't
    you try multiplying that by all the languages in the comp.lang.* hierarchy
    that you could potentially be selecting from? Take a spin by the Language
    Shootouts if you want to spin your head some more.
    http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/
    http://dada.perl.it/shootout/
    You need a filter of some kind for cutting down the options. I suggest
    asking people, and seeing what languages actually got used for jobs relevant
    to your software problem / industry.

    I'm waiting for someone to say that my participation in this thread
    constitutes trolling. I find it amusing that the boundary between
    "intelligent language discussion" and "trolling" is mainly a matter of who
    likes who, not the content. And, this is all I have to say on the subject,
    so have fun.

    --
    Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
    Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

    "Troll" - (n.) Anything you don't like.
    Usage: "He's just a troll."
     
    Brandon J. Van Every, Apr 26, 2004
    #18
  19. Hunn E. Balsiche wrote:

    > [Ruby, Python]
    > I've given up on Perl for its ugly syntax and it is not the easiest language
    > to learn. How about PHP?


    All these suck. You guys should grow up and start programming in *real*
    programming languages like Befunge.

    Oh, and you forgot to cross post to all the other 54 comp.lang groups.

    And now: Can we please never have threads like this one ever again?
    We're getting them on a twice-per-month base right now which makes these
    topics get old and very uninteresting quickly.

    PS: Don't take this too personal, but all this wouldn't have happened if
    you had searched in other resources before posting here.

    Regards,
    Florian Gross
     
    Florian Gross, Apr 26, 2004
    #19
  20. Hunn E. Balsiche

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <c6jmhh$cr0r2$-berlin.de>,
    Brandon J. Van Every <> wrote:
    >Cameron Laird wrote:
    >> .
    >> It's not just that "You won't know until you try" ("is it better
    >> to have children, or join the monastery?"); it's that you won't
    >> know until you try, *and it's inexpensive to try*! It's eminently
    >> feasible to gain experience in either language with a few hours (!)
    >> of work, as opposed to the weeks that must precede enlightenment
    >> about, say, J2EE servers.

    >
    >Of course, those of us who are more into the Complete Waste Of Time [TM]
    >theory of selecting software components will simply give you the bottom
    >line:
    >
    >- If you like Perl, you'll like Ruby. If you think Perl is a bletcherous
    >hack, you'll like Python.
    >- The Python community dwarfs the Ruby community.
    >- Both languages are slow.
    >- Python has lotsa libraries but not everything. Ask here regarding your
    >specific needs. Even if Python were the most elegant language in the world,
    >that's not useful if you must write everything from scratch and don't have
    >time to do it.
    >
    >This is the kind of information you get by simply asking people and reading
    >lotsa archives. Some people say "Try it yourself!" is the only way to
    >learn. They are wrong, and they often don't value people's time. You
    >really can rely on other people's reported experiences of the nuclear
    >mushroom cloud exploding over the horizon. It is not strictly necessary to
    >walk into Ground Zero yourself.
    >
    >Now, if you're going to argue "it's just a little Ruby code..." why don't
    >you try multiplying that by all the languages in the comp.lang.* hierarchy
    >that you could potentially be selecting from? Take a spin by the Language
    >Shootouts if you want to spin your head some more.
    >http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/
    >http://dada.perl.it/shootout/
    >You need a filter of some kind for cutting down the options. I suggest
    >asking people, and seeing what languages actually got used for jobs relevant
    >to your software problem / industry.
    >


    It seems as though he has already done this. He was interested in Ruby
    and Python (N=2). From there a couple of people (including myself)
    suggested that he make the determination about which to study indepth by
    actually doing a bit of coding in both languages. Spending a day or two
    on this exercise doesn't seem excessive if you're serious about selecting
    your 'next language' to learn in depth.

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Apr 26, 2004
    #20
    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. Replies:
    22
    Views:
    592
    Martin Maney
    May 11, 2004
  2. Dominic Maier

    brother tree insert

    Dominic Maier, Sep 7, 2004, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    314
    Keith Thompson
    Sep 7, 2004
  3. ronnie mccoy

    brother pe.design v 7.0 software

    ronnie mccoy, Mar 6, 2007, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    411
    ronnie mccoy
    Mar 6, 2007
  4. Hunn E. Balsiche
    Replies:
    34
    Views:
    345
    Gavin Sinclair
    Apr 30, 2004
  5. Mike Cox

    Ruby, brother of VB?

    Mike Cox, Mar 21, 2005, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    359
    Rob .
    Mar 21, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page