More gems than CPAN modules?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Robert Klemme, Jan 7, 2011.

  1. Robert Klemme, Jan 7, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Klemme

    Peter Hicks Guest

    On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 09:12:17PM +0900, Robert Klemme wrote:

    > Question is whether they are comparing apples and oranges...


    Or rubies and perls.


    Peter
     
    Peter Hicks, Jan 7, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Daniel Berger <> wrote:
    > On 1/7/11 5:12 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:
    >>
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> just saw these figures:
    >>
    >> http://www.modulecounts.com/
    >>
    >> Question is whether they are comparing apples and oranges...

    >
    > cpan.org shows 21,674 distributions, while rubygems.org shows 19,428 gems.
    > I'm not sure what they're scraping.


    Maybe the good old RAA, too. I have no idea if the site controls for
    multiple identical listings, or how the variants of Gems / modules are
    counted (QT-Ruby exists for at least Qt 3 and Qt 4, would those count
    as one gem or two gems? What about wxRuby? Rails? Etc.)

    The metric itself is debatable, anyway. Different capabilities of the
    standard libraries lead to different gems/modules, and several
    gems/modules solve the same problem in different ways. Not to mention
    if a module/gem is still actively maintained or not (and how would you
    measure *that*?).

    --
    Phillip Gawlowski

    Though the folk I have met,
    (Ah, how soon!) they forget
    When I've moved on to some other place,
    There may be one or two,
    When I've played and passed through,
    Who'll remember my song or my face.
     
    Phillip Gawlowski, Jan 7, 2011
    #3
  4. Robert Klemme

    Xavier Noria Guest

    On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Daniel Berger <> wrote:

    > cpan.org shows 21,674 distributions, while rubygems.org shows 19,428 gems.
    > I'm not sure what they're scraping.


    They count registered modules which is not a meaningful CPAN metric.

    Registering a module is something optional, it requires application
    etc. That's a fraction of CPAN.

    Since "module" is a Perl term (think .pm), to refer to a "library"
    CPAN uses the term "distribution", that's what you can compare
    numbers with. There are more distributions than gems as of this
    writing.
     
    Xavier Noria, Jan 7, 2011
    #4
  5. You want quality over quantity. :)
    --
    Regards,
    Casey
     
    Casey Hawthorne, Jan 7, 2011
    #5
  6. Robert Klemme

    Xavier Noria Guest

    On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Casey Hawthorne
    <> wrote:

    > You want quality over quantity. :)


    Only, do not assume more quantity implies less quality :)

    In fact, CPAN's standards regarding test suites and documentation are,
    generally speaking, still not matched in my opinion. Not to mention
    CPAN Testers etc.

    Gems are getting better and better, but in my view there's still walk to walk.
     
    Xavier Noria, Jan 7, 2011
    #6
    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:
    5
    Views:
    212
    Randy Kobes
    Oct 12, 2005
  2. PerlFAQ Server
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    172
    PerlFAQ Server
    Jan 24, 2011
  3. PerlFAQ Server
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    193
    PerlFAQ Server
    Mar 7, 2011
  4. Steven D'Aprano
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    116
    Steven D'Aprano
    Dec 23, 2013
  5. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    98
    Gary Herron
    Dec 23, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page