Komodo is the IDE for Ruby and Ruby on Rails!

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by zoat, Feb 21, 2007.

  1. zoat

    zoat Guest

    The new Komodo IDE 4.0 is the first unified workspace for end-to-end
    development of dynamic web applications. A rich feature set for client-
    side Ajax languages such as CSS, HTML, JavaScript and XML, coupled
    with advanced support for dynamic languages such as Perl, PHP, Python,
    Ruby and Tcl, enables developers to quickly and easily create robust
    web apps. Komodo is the first IDE to provide professional debugging
    tools for Ruby and Rails application development. The Ruby interactive
    shell is available separately or from within debugging sessions.
    Komodo is the IDE for Ruby and Ruby on Rails!
    http://www.activestate.com/products/komodo_ide/more_information.p
     
    zoat, Feb 21, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. zoat wrote:
    > The new Komodo IDE 4.0 is the first unified workspace for end-to-end
    > development of dynamic web applications. A rich feature set for client-
    > side Ajax languages such as CSS, HTML, JavaScript and XML, coupled
    > with advanced support for dynamic languages such as Perl, PHP, Python,
    > Ruby and Tcl, enables developers to quickly and easily create robust
    > web apps. Komodo is the first IDE to provide professional debugging
    > tools for Ruby and Rails application development. The Ruby interactive
    > shell is available separately or from within debugging sessions.
    > Komodo is the IDE for Ruby and Ruby on Rails!
    > http://www.activestate.com/products/komodo_ide/more_information.p
    >

    Well ... I have Komodo 4.0, but I haven't really attempted to develop a
    whole GUI-based application with it yet. But I have to disagree that
    it's the first "unified workspace for end-to-end development of dynamic
    web applications." I'd put a combination of KDevelop and Quanta ahead of
    Komodo, and I'm pretty sure Eclipse is as good or better. I ended up
    picking Komodo over KDevelop for two reasons:

    1. KDevelop and its friends, QtRuby, QtDesigner, Korundum and Kommander,
    really work well only on Linux and are really integrated well only with
    the KDE desktop. Komodo, on the other hand, works with all of the Linux
    desktops, and supports Windows a boatload better, especially if you are
    using the ActiveState Perl, Python, Tcl/Tk and other tools.

    2. I had a lot of trouble getting KDevelop to sync up with my RubyForge
    projects. I gave up on it after a day or so. Komodo picked up on them
    right out of the box. All I had to do was start Komodo in the directory,
    and it found the CVS stuff and just worked.

    --
    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
    http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

    If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.
     
    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Feb 22, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. zoat

    Griff Guest

    I bought it, too. It is pretty nice.

    It isn't the end all for IDEs, but it supports both Ruby and Perl, and
    every OS on which I would ever end up working for my job.
     
    Griff, Feb 22, 2007
    #3
  4. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    Chad Perrin wrote:
    > I'm extremely hesitant to go along with anything that eliminates flat
    > text files as a means of data storage when writing code, though. Plain
    > text is our best defense against data obsolescence and vendor lock-in.
    >

    *Especially* when you work on both Linux and Windows and have tools that
    seamlessly and transparently deal with the two different end-of-line
    conventions.

    <weg>

    :set fileformat=dos

    er ...

    ;)


    --
    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
    http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

    If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.
     
    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Feb 24, 2007
    #4
  5. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    But many times people find Vi or emacs just as hard to learn if not
    harder as an IDE. I did at first. Ctrl this, Alt that, how many keys
    was that again? Four!? It was just completely alien to my brain.

    I usually give my students something like SCiTe or Notepad++ to start
    out with. Keep it simple and familiar. If you want them to focus on
    the basics, then give them someting that is familiar, and as such gets
    out of their way, but also makes them work harder to keep their code
    formatted and working. Not only will they appreciate IDEs/code
    sensitive editors later on, they will be able to handle their editor's
    quirkiness better and more intuitively.

    --Jeremy

    On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    >
    > I apologize in advance if I offend anyone on this list. My post below is
    > more a rant than a question.
    >
    > Yes I agree that Komodo is a very nice IDE. When I am teaching programming
    > one, I find that many of my students get so involved with using the lasted
    > IDE ; that they lose sight of the project they should be working on. I
    > suggest to my students to use either Vi or emacs to get the job done.
    >
    > Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    > programming. It seems to me, that the next generation of programmers expect
    > the newest and latest IDE to write the code for them. More than once a
    > student has come to me with simple nesting errors that was missed by the IDE
    > they were using. Each of us here as been bitten at once by the dangling
    > Else error using C++. One of my students debated with me over this very
    > problem because the IDE he was using did not catch this error.
    >
    >
    > Come on Spring Break
    >
    >
    >
    > Sam



    --
    http://www.jeremymcanally.com/

    My free Ruby e-book:
    http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/book/

    My blogs:
    http://www.mrneighborly.com/
    http://www.rubyinpractice.com/
     
    Jeremy McAnally, Feb 24, 2007
    #5
  6. zoat

    John Wilger Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On Feb 23, 8:11 am, wrote:
    > What I'd really like to see is a programming environment where the IDE
    > isn't a cunning layer over the underlying reality, but where it's an
    > equally valid interpretation of the data. Then you can work at what ever
    > level you like, and see what ever details you like. This isn't going to
    > happen while we're still storing our programs and data as flat text
    > files though, in my opinion.


    Uhm... Smalltalk anyone? :)
     
    John Wilger, Feb 24, 2007
    #6
  7. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    >
    > Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    > programming.


    Why is why a text editor isn't the best thing either - the "basics of
    programming" should ideally let you write code, without worrying about
    setting up your environment and include paths properly, getting the
    right commands to compile/run it, etc. You should be open up an IDE,
    type in some code, and hit a button to have it run, interact with the
    debugger, etc.

    martin
     
    Martin DeMello, Feb 24, 2007
    #7
  8. zoat

    Alex Young Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    Martin DeMello wrote:
    > On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    >> programming.

    >
    > Why is why a text editor isn't the best thing either - the "basics of
    > programming" should ideally let you write code, without worrying about
    > setting up your environment and include paths properly, getting the
    > right commands to compile/run it, etc. You should be open up an IDE,
    > type in some code, and hit a button to have it run,

    Like in Scite, you mean? :)

    --
    Alex
     
    Alex Young, Feb 24, 2007
    #8
  9. zoat

    Chad Perrin Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 05:28:51PM +0900, Martin DeMello wrote:
    > On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    > >
    > >Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    > >programming.

    >
    > Why is why a text editor isn't the best thing either - the "basics of
    > programming" should ideally let you write code, without worrying about
    > setting up your environment and include paths properly, getting the
    > right commands to compile/run it, etc. You should be open up an IDE,
    > type in some code, and hit a button to have it run, interact with the
    > debugger, etc.


    Alex Young makes a good point, re: SciTE, in answer to this. My
    immediate thought, though, was that this isn't necessarily the realm of
    the tools you use -- for instance, Ruby mostly solves these problems
    pretty handily, regardless of what kind of editor you're using.

    --
    CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
    "Real ugliness is not harsh-looking syntax, but having to
    build programs out of the wrong concepts." - Paul Graham
     
    Chad Perrin, Feb 24, 2007
    #9
  10. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On 2/23/07, John Wilger <> wrote:
    > On Feb 23, 8:11 am, wrote:
    > > What I'd really like to see is a programming environment where the IDE
    > > isn't a cunning layer over the underlying reality, but where it's an
    > > equally valid interpretation of the data. Then you can work at what ever
    > > level you like, and see what ever details you like. This isn't going to
    > > happen while we're still storing our programs and data as flat text
    > > files though, in my opinion.

    >
    > Uhm... Smalltalk anyone? :)


    Yep, to the OP on this subset of the thread, you've just done
    Smalltalk in a nutshell, basically. Although I must admit I've never
    actually seen syntax-coloring in Smalltalk. It probably exists,
    though.

    --
    Giles Bowkett
    http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
    http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com
    http://gilesgoatboy.blogspot.com
     
    Giles Bowkett, Feb 26, 2007
    #10
  11. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    Servando, why don't you just ban IDEs in your classroom?

    I always seek the type of perspective that allows me to rise above a
    contentious debate, but with the IDE/text editor thing, I've never
    managed to do it. I still haven't even been able to figure out why
    anybody would ever even **try** with an IDE. I've tried, but only for
    the sake of giving the other side a chance, and if that was the only
    reason people ever used IDEs, there wouldn't be sides to begin with.

    There must be a good reason for using an IDE, but I bet you even the
    most staunch pro-IDE advocate is still going to say that IDEs are for
    people who already know what they're doing.

    Tell them they have to walk before they can run and take their IDEs away.

    On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    >
    > I apologize in advance if I offend anyone on this list. My post below is
    > more a rant than a question.
    >
    > Yes I agree that Komodo is a very nice IDE. When I am teaching programming
    > one, I find that many of my students get so involved with using the lasted
    > IDE ; that they lose sight of the project they should be working on. I
    > suggest to my students to use either Vi or emacs to get the job done.
    >
    > Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    > programming. It seems to me, that the next generation of programmers expect
    > the newest and latest IDE to write the code for them. More than once a
    > student has come to me with simple nesting errors that was missed by the IDE
    > they were using. Each of us here as been bitten at once by the dangling
    > Else error using C++. One of my students debated with me over this very
    > problem because the IDE he was using did not catch this error.
    >
    >
    > Come on Spring Break
    >
    >
    >
    > Sam



    --
    Giles Bowkett
    http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
    http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com
    http://gilesgoatboy.blogspot.com
     
    Giles Bowkett, Feb 26, 2007
    #11
  12. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    Alternatively, maybe I'm just being grumpy. Googling "ide vs text
    editor" turns up a lot of results.

    On 2/25/07, Giles Bowkett <> wrote:
    > Servando, why don't you just ban IDEs in your classroom?
    >
    > I always seek the type of perspective that allows me to rise above a
    > contentious debate, but with the IDE/text editor thing, I've never
    > managed to do it. I still haven't even been able to figure out why
    > anybody would ever even **try** with an IDE. I've tried, but only for
    > the sake of giving the other side a chance, and if that was the only
    > reason people ever used IDEs, there wouldn't be sides to begin with.
    >
    > There must be a good reason for using an IDE, but I bet you even the
    > most staunch pro-IDE advocate is still going to say that IDEs are for
    > people who already know what they're doing.
    >
    > Tell them they have to walk before they can run and take their IDEs away.
    >
    > On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    > >
    > > I apologize in advance if I offend anyone on this list. My post below is
    > > more a rant than a question.
    > >
    > > Yes I agree that Komodo is a very nice IDE. When I am teaching programming
    > > one, I find that many of my students get so involved with using the lasted
    > > IDE ; that they lose sight of the project they should be working on. I
    > > suggest to my students to use either Vi or emacs to get the job done.
    > >
    > > Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    > > programming. It seems to me, that the next generation of programmers expect
    > > the newest and latest IDE to write the code for them. More than once a
    > > student has come to me with simple nesting errors that was missed by the IDE
    > > they were using. Each of us here as been bitten at once by the dangling
    > > Else error using C++. One of my students debated with me over this very
    > > problem because the IDE he was using did not catch this error.
    > >
    > >
    > > Come on Spring Break
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Sam

    >
    >
    > --
    > Giles Bowkett
    > http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
    > http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com
    > http://gilesgoatboy.blogspot.com
    >
    >



    --
    Giles Bowkett
    http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
    http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com
    http://gilesgoatboy.blogspot.com
     
    Giles Bowkett, Feb 26, 2007
    #12
  13. zoat

    John Wilger Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On Feb 25, 4:02 pm, "Giles Bowkett" <> wrote:
    > Smalltalk in a nutshell, basically. Although I must admit I've never
    > actually seen syntax-coloring in Smalltalk. It probably exists,
    > though.


    In Squeak, at least, coloring is built in to the default Browser in
    the same place where you select the prettyPrint option. Don't recall
    off the top of my head what exactly the option is called, and don't
    have a VM on this machine...

    --
    Regards,

    John Wilger
     
    John Wilger, Feb 26, 2007
    #13
  14. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    There must be something wrong with my image, then. I'm missing both
    syntax coloring and prettyPrint. I can manually color the text an
    arbitrary color, that's it.

    On 2/25/07, John Wilger <> wrote:
    > On Feb 25, 4:02 pm, "Giles Bowkett" <> wrote:
    > > Smalltalk in a nutshell, basically. Although I must admit I've never
    > > actually seen syntax-coloring in Smalltalk. It probably exists,
    > > though.

    >
    > In Squeak, at least, coloring is built in to the default Browser in
    > the same place where you select the prettyPrint option. Don't recall
    > off the top of my head what exactly the option is called, and don't
    > have a VM on this machine...
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > John Wilger
    >
    >
    >



    --
    Giles Bowkett
    http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
    http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com
    http://gilesgoatboy.blogspot.com
     
    Giles Bowkett, Feb 26, 2007
    #14
  15. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On 2/24/07, Martin DeMello <> wrote:
    > On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    > >
    > > Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    > > programming.

    >
    > Why is why a text editor isn't the best thing either - the "basics of
    > programming" should ideally let you write code, without worrying about
    > setting up your environment and include paths properly, getting the
    > right commands to compile/run it, etc. You should be open up an IDE,
    > type in some code, and hit a button to have it run, interact with the
    > debugger, etc.


    http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2007/02/its_lunchtime_a.html

    Kathy Sierra seems to disagree with me. Interesting read.

    martin
     
    Martin DeMello, Feb 26, 2007
    #15
  16. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    Martin DeMello schrieb:
    > On 2/24/07, Martin DeMello <> wrote:
    >> On 2/23/07, Servando Garcia <> wrote:
    >> >
    >> > Beginning programmers should concentrate solely on the basics of
    >> > programming.

    >>
    >> Why is why a text editor isn't the best thing either - the "basics of
    >> programming" should ideally let you write code, without worrying about
    >> setting up your environment and include paths properly, getting the
    >> right commands to compile/run it, etc. You should be open up an IDE,
    >> type in some code, and hit a button to have it run, interact with the
    >> debugger, etc.

    >
    > http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2007/02/its_lunchtime_a.html
    >
    >
    > Kathy Sierra seems to disagree with me. Interesting read.
    >
    > martin
    >


    What is the difference between Error an Horror ?

    In my opinion the Community is most helpful but, by the numbers of
    questions resp
    problems, to me it seems a tremendeous waste of time (and thoughts) because
    this shows that (also) ruby lacks the clarity (not only) I am looking for.
    There would be much less questions and therefore more productivity,
    if there would be a clarity in this language - using human language
    resp. mnemonic -
    like using Basic or Cobol or Pascal or D (or even Assembler).

    Using Ruby (and Python ...) with its complicated coding, we don`t need
    the power
    of todays Computers because we do, by this kind of languages,
    the precompiling in our heads instead of using the given hardware
    (which is much faster in doing this - and every time in the same way /
    straight forward -
    not asking the number of questions - average about 150 per day - we do
    in this forum!)
    I think there is only ONE way: using the above mentioned languages in
    precompilers
    - for the pupose of transportability to different Sytems - generating
    i.e. Java bytecode
    (.class). There could be jBasic, jCobol etc.

    COMPUTER-LANGUAGES should not be treated as a religion but as a tool for
    DOING SOME WORK FOR US.
    We should not longue for a code consisting of the smallest number of
    characters.
    There should be very little questions about the language (how will it me
    understand,
    will it do what I want) but how can I implement the wanted logic using
    human language
    resp mnemonic so there will be a readable and simple maintainable code
    (even from project independent poeple).
    TRICKY code - in this way - must be named as DIRTY code!
    There are too many symbols with special meaning.

    i.e some forum questions:

    Is my code using the Ruby way ?

    hi im new to ROR and although i know how to work with controllers
    I‘m having difficulty understanding what exactly they are and why they
    are used?
    please help enlighten me :)

    Yeah, I did the former already (I like it better that way).
    And omitting the ==true part makes the code more readable.

    Very tricky!
    Let‘s make it a little shorter and more robust:
    class A
    def say_hi
    m = %r/([^:]+):(\d+)/.match caller.first
    return if m.nil?
    ...
    (c = result.match(/id: (\d+)/)) ? c.captures.first : result.scan(/error:
    (.*)/).to_s

    Is there a smoother/better way to say this?

    Hi,
    Could anyone tell me or send links where I can find some reliable articles
    about efficiency of ruby.
    How I should coding to keep ruby efficient?

    Err... fix the alias bug though (damn no-comma gets me every time!),
    ......
    ...
    Klaus Ramelow
     
    Klaus Ramelow, Feb 27, 2007
    #16
  17. zoat

    Kyle Schmitt Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On 2/27/07, Klaus Ramelow <> wrote:
    > In my opinion the Community is most helpful but, by the numbers of
    > questions resp
    > problems, to me it seems a tremendeous waste of time (and thoughts) because
    > this shows that (also) ruby lacks the clarity (not only) I am looking for.
    > There would be much less questions and therefore more productivity,
    > if there would be a clarity in this language - using human language
    > resp. mnemonic -
    > like using Basic or Cobol or Pascal or D (or even Assembler).
    >
    > Using Ruby (and Python ...) with its complicated coding, we don`t need
    > the power
    > of todays Computers because we do, by this kind of languages,
    > the precompiling in our heads instead of using the given hardware
    > (which is much faster in doing this - and every time in the same way /
    > straight forward -
    > not asking the number of questions - average about 150 per day - we do
    > in this forum!)
    > I think there is only ONE way: using the above mentioned languages in
    > precompilers
    > - for the pupose of transportability to different Sytems - generating
    > i.e. Java bytecode
    > (.class). There could be jBasic, jCobol etc.
    >
    > COMPUTER-LANGUAGES should not be treated as a religion but as a tool for
    > DOING SOME WORK FOR US.
    > We should not longue for a code consisting of the smallest number of
    > characters.
    > There should be very little questions about the language (how will it me
    > understand,
    > will it do what I want) but how can I implement the wanted logic using
    > human language
    > resp mnemonic so there will be a readable and simple maintainable code
    > (even from project independent poeple).
    > TRICKY code - in this way - must be named as DIRTY code!
    > There are too many symbols with special meaning.


    OK OK, I'll bite about the first parts..

    Any language, human or computer, effects how you think about the
    problem at hand. I can't cite anything off the top of my head, and
    I'm at work so I can't exactly go looking it up ;) but there is
    research that shows that point.
    Programming languages, and human languages, all lack clarity when
    they are being abused, used by people who don't know them well (like
    those who are learning and often post basic questions on this list),
    and those who are in the habit of using them poorly. To those who
    know Perl, Ruby and even Lisp*, they make immediate sense, and are as
    clear as any diagram of psudocode on the white board. If you think in
    a language, you've found the legendary DWIM (Do What I Mean).

    And I'll bring up one more thing. What about the joy of learning the
    language? The joy of learning what makes things work? In real code,
    yes, the idea of writing the shortest possible program may be silly,
    but when learning, when exploring, it's important to do things like...
    Write a self replicating program; Try and make a basic xml validation
    method in 100 lines or less; Write Conway's game of life in as few
    calls as possible. Immediately useful? No. Ultimately makes someone
    a better programmer? Probably. Ultimately make someone a more fluent
    programmer in that language? Definitely.

    Heck when you teach people a foreign language you do the same
    thing. At some point you have to show them how to play with the
    sticky nasty bits of it, otherwise the learner never will gain the
    full understanding, the full polish of the language. Think of: the
    use of a and an in English; the use of the colons and semicolons I
    abuse so regularly; the tricks to make grammatically correct paragraph
    long sentences; the use of the apostrophe, which seems to elude the
    grasp of many native speakers now a days.

    --Kyle A. Schmitt



    * OK yes there are languages that make _no_ reasonable sense at all,
    BF unLambda and VB6 come to mind.
     
    Kyle Schmitt, Feb 27, 2007
    #17
  18. Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    This discussion is plain crazy. Yes it is crucial that students learn
    all of the low level underlying concepts in their chosen endevour, but
    don't force inadequate tools on people who write for a living and need
    to be as productive as possible.

    When I started programming 20+ years ago I did everything in Assembler,
    learnt how to squeeze the last byte out of what I wrote, learnt how to
    use a debugger in depth and learnt how to profile my code to find the
    hotspots. All of these have stayed with me and held me in good stead
    over the years. If you are writing in a compiled language and don't know
    how to read assembler or use a debugger (which many students don't),
    then you've got a big problem.

    Syntax highlighting is a huge boost to productivity as it can instantly
    make problems visible while you are writing, instead of waisting time
    with edit-compile-edit cycles. Can you spot the difference between: id =
    "%x" % (ab * 2) and id = "%x" %(ab * 2) or will you have to wait for
    Ruby to tell you?

    Do you want to keep pressing space/tab/backspace to get your code
    indented nicely or do you want to get on with real task of writing code
    and let the editor automatically indent your code for you.

    And the person who said they need to know every file and whats in it, is
    nuts IMO. I want to edit method abc or class xyw - I don't care what
    file these are in, or what drive or directory that file is in, or be
    concerned if another developer has moved them to a different file. I
    just want to get on and work with the code, and let the editor keep
    track of where every method, class etc is located. If you've ever worked
    on a complex set of code with hundreds or worse, thousands of files,
    then having the code navigation capabilities I'm referring to are
    essential.

    I write software for a living and like any wise tradespersons, I use the
    best tools that enable me to be the most productive, so that I can have
    some chance at delivering products to my customers in a timely fashion.

    As for Komodo I humbly suggest you look at our IDE, ED4W. See:
    http://blog.surfulater.com/2007/02/21/write-ruby-code-faster-with-ed-for-windows/

    Neville Franks, author of ED for Windows and Surfulater.


    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
     
    Neville Franks, Feb 27, 2007
    #18
  19. zoat

    Chad Perrin Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 03:45:03AM +0900, Klaus Ramelow wrote:
    >
    > In my opinion the Community is most helpful but, by the numbers of
    > questions resp
    > problems, to me it seems a tremendeous waste of time (and thoughts) because
    > this shows that (also) ruby lacks the clarity (not only) I am looking for.
    > There would be much less questions and therefore more productivity,
    > if there would be a clarity in this language - using human language
    > resp. mnemonic -
    > like using Basic or Cobol or Pascal or D (or even Assembler).


    Okay, I'm confused -- you just compared Pascal and assembly language
    favorably to Ruby with regard to clarity and familiarity with human
    language. Have you actually looked at much Pascal code? If so: Have
    you actually looked at much Ruby code for the comparison?

    It's true that BASIC and COBOL tend to use words taken directly from
    English or made by mashing English language words together. There's
    more to easing the process of programming than that, however, and once
    you're working with algorithms more complex than a "Hello World"
    program, BASIC and COBOL start looking like hashed browns with catsup.

    My first, immediate, reaction was to label you a troll. I want to give
    you the benefit of the doubt, however. Perhaps you just failed to make
    your point clearly, and I'm missing something important as a result.
    Judging by my experience, however, your statements tend to imply the
    opposite of reality. You seem to be saying the sky is hard and the
    ground is blue, that baking soda is wet and water is abrasive.


    >
    > COMPUTER-LANGUAGES should not be treated as a religion but as a tool for
    > DOING SOME WORK FOR US.
    > We should not longue for a code consisting of the smallest number of
    > characters.
    > There should be very little questions about the language (how will it me
    > understand,
    > will it do what I want) but how can I implement the wanted logic using
    > human language
    > resp mnemonic so there will be a readable and simple maintainable code
    > (even from project independent poeple).


    Every time you learn a new language, you have to learn new things.
    Someone who knew Ruby would have to learn a bunch of new stuff trying to
    pick up Pascal as a new programming language. Same difference. The
    only reason there are fewer questions on a Pascal mailing list than here
    is that there are fewer new Pascal users on a Pascal mailing list.

    I agree that programming languages are tools, not religions. That's one
    of the reasons I favor Ruby over the languages with which you contrasted
    it. There are times when assembly language is more appropriate than
    Ruby, of course, but those times are few and far between because of the
    limitations of a language so difficult to use for complex operations
    (and even a five-line Ruby program that can be read and understood in
    less than a second performs some complex operations). Ruby provides
    abstraction which, like a longer lever, allows you to make bigger
    changes with less effort, but can get in the way of extreme fine-tuning
    of the sort you'd get with assembly language (or tweezers, for the lever
    analogy).

    If we wanted code consisting of the fewest possible characters, we'd be
    using something like Ada. We just want clean, readable, maintainable
    code, so we use Ruby.

    You made an off-hand reference to Python. I don't like Python much.
    Some of its idioms and some of its restrictions to "one right way" just
    rub me the *wrong way*. I don't like the syntax, I don't like the way
    it tries to be an object oriented language while still keeping some
    multi-paradigmatic language characteristics so that it seems a little
    like there's a seam through the middle of the language where it was
    stitched together.

    That's all my personal taste, though; it's subjective opinion. Looking
    at it objectively, Python is an excellent language. If you want
    evidence that I'm not just defending Ruby against your complaints
    because I like Ruby, here it is: I don't like Python. I don't want to
    have to program in that language for a living, ever. I may eventually
    want to learn more about the language, if only to better understand why
    I don't like it, but at the same time I don't want to have to look at
    Python source code. Despite all this, I recognize its clarity, ease of
    use, and clean design for those who *do* like it. Pretty much
    everything I've said about Ruby in this message, and the fact that your
    conclusions about what's "wrong" with Ruby simply don't seem to fit the
    facts, applies equally well to Python.

    As far as I can tell, you're somewhere out in left field.

    --
    CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
    "There comes a time in the history of any project when it becomes necessary
    to shoot the engineers and begin production." - MacUser, November 1990
     
    Chad Perrin, Feb 27, 2007
    #19
  20. zoat

    Mat Schaffer Guest

    Re: Rant abouts IDE's

    On Feb 27, 2007, at 5:31 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
    > As far as I can tell, you're somewhere out in left field.


    +1
     
    Mat Schaffer, Feb 28, 2007
    #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. meissnersd

    Komodo ide font color issue

    meissnersd, Jun 4, 2005, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    582
    meissnersd
    Jun 4, 2005
  2. Ilias Lazaridis
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    499
    Ilias Lazaridis
    Jan 28, 2006
  3. Curt Hibbs
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    370
    Gene Tani
    Dec 13, 2005
  4. Ilias Lazaridis
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    136
    Ilias Lazaridis
    Jan 26, 2006
  5. Ilias Lazaridis
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    174
    Ilias Lazaridis
    Jan 28, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page