Python 25 times as popular as Ruby !?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Lothar Scholz, Feb 1, 2004.

  1. Hey,

    i spend 30 minutes by checking the statistics page of popular and well
    known ruby and python projects. The result is a real fiasco for ruby
    in some areas.

    For example

    Jython 100 <-> Jruby 4
    Ruby GTK 15 (FXRuby 8) <-> WxPython 700
    Ruby DBI 70 <-> mysql-python 150


    i also checked a lot of other packages but could find comparable ones.
    But the numbers are the same. And when you compare the newsgroups
    comp.lang.python<->comp.lang.ruby you see the same. clr seems to be
    more code philosophical questions where clp is about developing
    software.

    So do you think the difference is the same. For my website i can only
    confirm that it is at least a 4:1 for python.
     
    Lothar Scholz, Feb 1, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lothar Scholz

    Martin Weber Guest

    On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 03:44:50PM +0900, Lothar Scholz wrote:
    > Hey,
    >
    > i spend 30 minutes by checking the statistics page of popular and well
    > known ruby and python projects. The result is a real fiasco for ruby
    > in some areas.


    I just say ``BSD is dead.'' :)

    -Martin (<-- bsd user)
     
    Martin Weber, Feb 1, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lothar Scholz

    Dan Doel Guest

    Lothar Scholz wrote:

    >The result is a real fiasco for ruby in some areas.
    >

    Why is this a fiasco?

    Why must Ruby be far more known than Python?

    We here know it and like it. I'm sure if other people ask us our opinion
    on a good
    language, we'll suggest Ruby.

    But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    or whatever?

    If you like it, use it. If you don't, don't. One needn't worry so much
    about what other
    people are doing.

    After all, Ruby isn't a religion, and it isn't in a contest with other
    languages.

    - Dan
     
    Dan Doel, Feb 1, 2004
    #3
  4. Lothar Scholz

    MikkelFJ Guest

    Fra: "Lothar Scholz" <>
    Emne: Python 25 times as popular as Ruby !?
    Dato: 1. februar 2004 07:43


    > comp.lang.ruby you see the same. clr seems to be
    > more code philosophical questions where clp is about developing
    > software.



    I have learnt more about software development in c.l.r. than in any other
    forum.

    The greatest thing about Ruby is its friendly community, the intellect
    behind it, and the tolerance and curiosity towards other interesting not
    necessarily Ruby-related technologies. The language comes second to that. As
    Ruby grows more popular, c.l.r. becomes more nuts'n bolts for better and
    worse. But it is one reason I'm spending less time here these days - too
    many posts to dig through. Just subjectively tracking c.l.r. from a distance
    convinces me that more and more people are using Ruby. From zero knowledge
    to an unscientific 1 / 25 of Python in 4 years of exposure to the english
    speaking community is not bad at all considering Python has presumably grown
    a lot in the same timeframe. Today every decent developer has at least heard
    of Ruby.

    I reckon the only really good projects you picked for comparison are the
    database projects because these are used by the kind of projects best done
    by scripting - e.g. GUI has issues with deployment and portability despite
    the efforts. You might also want to look at template engines like Amrita,
    XML parsers and web frameworks. Some of the really popular Ruby projects
    have migrated into the Ruby distribution (e.g. REXML) and may not see much
    exposure elsewhere - I guess this is also true for Python.


    Mikkel
     
    MikkelFJ, Feb 1, 2004
    #4
  5. MikkelFJ wrote:
    >>comp.lang.ruby you see the same. clr seems to be
    >>more code philosophical questions where clp is about developing
    >>software.

    >
    > I have learnt more about software development in c.l.r. than in any other
    > forum.


    I have found c.l.r to be a friendly and helpful community, but so are
    comp.lang.python and most other comp.*. Only a handful of newsgroups and
    mailing lists are actually a hostile environment (and even when they
    are, it's not all of the time...)

    --
    dave
     
    David Garamond, Feb 1, 2004
    #5
  6. Lothar Scholz

    Tim Hunter Guest

    On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:53:21 +0900, Dan Doel wrote:

    > After all, Ruby isn't a religion, and it isn't in a contest with other
    > languages.


    Hear, hear! Well said!
     
    Tim Hunter, Feb 1, 2004
    #6
  7. On Sunday 01 of February 2004 08:53, Dan Doel wrote:
    > But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    > or whatever?


    because then i can do ruby at my daily work instead of suffering in C# :O)
    for now ruby is only acceptable for internal tools, clients want
    buzzword-compliant tools. python might be in this class soon, and i'd like
    ruby to get there too.. (and i trust matz not to cripple the language to get
    there)

    emmanuel
     
    Emmanuel Touzery, Feb 1, 2004
    #7
  8. Hello Dan,

    Sunday, February 1, 2004, 8:53:21 AM, you wrote:


    DD> But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    DD> or whatever?

    It's simple. The evolution depends on the size of the active
    community. I don't mean students who pick it up for a course, or
    people writting there first script, but people using it in a
    professional (commerical) environment.

    You can't deny that there is a correlation between this and the
    quality of the libraries (maybe not the core) and found/fixed bugs.


    --
    Best regards,
    Lothar mailto:
     
    Lothar Scholz, Feb 1, 2004
    #8
  9. Dan Doel wrote:

    > Lothar Scholz wrote:
    >
    >> The result is a real fiasco for ruby in some areas.
    >>

    > Why is this a fiasco?
    >
    > Why must Ruby be far more known than Python?


    No one said that.


    > We here know it and like it. I'm sure if other people ask us our opinion
    > on a good
    > language, we'll suggest Ruby.


    And if that other person is in charge of actually deciding something (like say, your boss), often they will get many opinions. If your opinion is "ruby" and 4 others are "python", guess which way they will go?


    > But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    > or whatever?


    See above. And as Lothar said, so more bugs will be found, more libraries will be written, better chance of using it in the workplace.

    If it doesn't grow, it will eventually die.
     
    Michael campbell, Feb 1, 2004
    #9
  10. Lothar Scholz

    Dan Doel Guest

    Michael campbell wrote:

    > No one said that.



    Yes, I was exaggerating for effect. :)

    > If it doesn't grow, it will eventually die.


    Will it? Is Smalltalk still growing today? It probably hasn't grown
    for quite some time, yet it's still around if you want to learn it.
    How about Eiffel? People are even moving away from C and C++, but I
    doubt they'll be dead for many years to come.

    In any case (and this is a reply to several posts, not just yours),
    Ruby will get popular some day. Or maybe it won't, and we'll either
    continue to talk about it here and use it from time to time just
    because it's a nice language, or we'll move on to something else.
    The world will go on.

    What we don't need to do is organize a big campaign to get Ruby
    awareness up. We don't need to contact big players like IBM and
    whoever to push Ruby for all sorts of programming -- "Look, it
    was made for scripting but you should use it for OS programming and
    high speed graphics too!" We don't need to go into Slashdot stories
    or forums about other languages and post messages going "Ruby rox!
    Go check it out!"

    Everyone hates evangelists except for those who are already in the
    religion. They get offended that you're implying your beliefs are
    better than theirs. If someone's curious about Ruby, or wants a
    language suggestion, tell them to check it out, but don't become
    an evangelist.

    In the mean time, posts like, "Python is 25 times more popular than
    Ruby" or "Ruby needs Python indenting to be popular!" just waste time.
    Ruby will either get there, or it won't, based on whether it's worthy
    or not. Don't worry so much about how long it takes.

    Waiting is.

    - Dan
     
    Dan Doel, Feb 1, 2004
    #10
  11. Lothar Scholz

    Guest

    Emmanuel Touzery wrote:

    > On Sunday 01 of February 2004 08:53, Dan Doel wrote:
    >
    >>But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    >>or whatever?

    >
    >
    > because then i can do ruby at my daily work instead of suffering in C# :O)
    > for now ruby is only acceptable for internal tools, clients want
    > buzzword-compliant tools. python might be in this class soon, and i'd like
    > ruby to get there too.. (and i trust matz not to cripple the language to get
    > there)



    I second that. I get to do some Ruby coding at my current contract gig,
    but it's largely under the radar. Too many places prefer to stick with
    so-called "tried and true" languages and vendors; getting Ruby in the
    door is something of a stealth act.

    Perhaps in the grand scheme of things concerns over popularity seem
    trivial, but there really are some day-to-day practical matters as well.

    Gaining mind-share may not be so hard, provided the Ruby community puts
    enough effort into, among other things, comprehensive documentation, and
    an easy package management tool.

    With the new Ri/Rdoc, RubyGems, and ruby-doc.org, I'm optimistic, but
    there's still work to be done.

    James
     
    , Feb 1, 2004
    #11
  12. Hello Dan,

    Sunday, February 1, 2004, 8:12:13 PM, you wrote:

    DD> Michael campbell wrote:

    >> No one said that.



    DD> Yes, I was exaggerating for effect. :)

    >> If it doesn't grow, it will eventually die.


    DD> Will it? Is Smalltalk still growing today? It probably hasn't grown
    DD> for quite some time, yet it's still around if you want to learn it.
    DD> How about Eiffel? People are even moving away from C and C++, but I
    DD> doubt they'll be dead for many years to come.

    As the only one who uses GNU Eiffel for a program > 200.000 LOC i must
    say that eiffel is dead. Two vendors stopped there support (Visual
    Eiffel, Halstenbach), GNU Eiffel is becomming more and more unuseable
    for real development (everything after the great renaming SmallEiffel
    => Smarteiffel) and ISE raised there prices by a factor of 3
    (it's now 5000 USD for a not very good system).

    Smalltalk is also dying or better becaming less and less attrictive.
    Same as lisp where only Franz Lisp is still competitive in some areas.
    In fact in commerical areas Smalltalk is much more dead then Eiffel.

    DD> In any case (and this is a reply to several posts, not just yours),
    DD> Ruby will get popular some day. Or maybe it won't, and we'll either
    DD> continue to talk about it here and use it from time to time just
    DD> because it's a nice language, or we'll move on to something else.
    DD> The world will go on.

    DD> What we don't need to do is organize a big campaign to get Ruby
    DD> awareness up. We don't need to contact big players like IBM and

    No but the spirit of people hacking a library should maybe move from a
    "it's good enough for me" attitude to a "i want good quality" way. For
    most libraries the additional overhead won't be so much. But this is
    still a real problem.

    DD> In the mean time, posts like, "Python is 25 times more popular than
    DD> Ruby" or "Ruby needs Python indenting to be popular!" just waste time.

    Like much other posting on this newsgroup, for example about indenting
    styles. I posted it because i think a few people didn't recognize the
    real world situtation. And this is always not good. I'm just bored
    about threads that everything is fine with ruby and working well.


    --
    Best regards,
    Lothar mailto:
     
    Lothar Scholz, Feb 1, 2004
    #12
  13. Lothar Scholz

    Dan Doel Guest

    Lothar Scholz wrote:

    >As the only one who uses GNU Eiffel for a program > 200.000 LOC i must
    >say that eiffel is dead. Two vendors stopped there support (Visual
    >Eiffel, Halstenbach), GNU Eiffel is becomming more and more unuseable
    >for real development (everything after the great renaming SmallEiffel
    >=> Smarteiffel) and ISE raised there prices by a factor of 3
    >(it's now 5000 USD for a not very good system).
    >
    >

    On my Windows partition, I have the free student/trial version of a
    commercial Eiffel development environment installed. They seem to think
    Eiffel isn't dead.

    >Smalltalk is also dying or better becaming less and less attrictive.
    >
    >

    Smalltalk is still out there, though. I'm sure Squeak will be around for
    many years teaching interested parties what real object oriented languages
    should be like. Even if it's not used directly, I hope Smalltalk will be
    influencing the latest generation of "buzzword compliant" languages
    for years to come.

    >Same as lisp where only Franz Lisp is still competitive in some areas.
    >
    >

    You should go tell the people at comp.lang.lisp, c.l.scheme and
    c.l.functional that Lisp is dead. :)

    >No but the spirit of people hacking a library should maybe move from a
    >"it's good enough for me" attitude to a "i want good quality" way. For
    >most libraries the additional overhead won't be so much. But this is
    >still a real problem.
    >
    >

    I'm sure the people working on code at RubyForge and the like -- that is,
    the people writing code/libraries for public consumption -- already have
    this mentality.

    >Like much other posting on this newsgroup, for example about indenting
    >styles. I posted it because i think a few people didn't recognize the
    >real world situtation. And this is always not good. I'm just bored
    >about threads that everything is fine with ruby and working well.
    >
    >

    I didn't mean that as a personal attack against you (we get lots of
    posts here that say such things), so I hope you didn't take offense.
    However, saying that Ruby needs Python indenting or C++ braces isn't
    the real world situation. It may be the real world situation that
    Python is more popular than Ruby, but how popular was Python 5 years
    ago? It's just been exposed to more of the world for longer. Ruby
    will get there when it gets there. It _is_ doing fine. Matz is working
    to make it better with Rite, and people discussing here is helping
    him along (I hope).

    Not all threads here are lovey dovey. There's debate about which
    directions Ruby should go. But merely posting "Python is way more
    popular" isn't constructive toward making Ruby better.

    In any case, we should wrap this discussion up soon. I'd rather not
    see it turn into one of the 300+ message threads with lots of flame
    wars (which it has a high potential of doing).

    - Dan
     
    Dan Doel, Feb 1, 2004
    #13
  14. Lothar Scholz

    Robert K. Guest

    Oh, I understand.

    You suggesting us, becoming more.
    Ok, let's think....yes, I am there. But how can I become more than one ? hm

    Lothar Scholz schrieb:

    > Hello Dan,
    >
    > Sunday, February 1, 2004, 8:53:21 AM, you wrote:
    >
    >
    > DD> But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    > DD> or whatever?
    >
    > It's simple. The evolution depends on the size of the active
    > community. I don't mean students who pick it up for a course, or
    > people writting there first script, but people using it in a
    > professional (commerical) environment.
    >
    > You can't deny that there is a correlation between this and the
    > quality of the libraries (maybe not the core) and found/fixed bugs.
    >
    >
     
    Robert K., Feb 1, 2004
    #14
  15. Emmanuel Touzery wrote:

    > On Sunday 01 of February 2004 08:53, Dan Doel wrote:
    >
    >>But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    >>or whatever?

    >
    >
    > because then i can do ruby at my daily work instead of suffering in C# :O)
    > for now ruby is only acceptable for internal tools, clients want
    > buzzword-compliant tools. python might be in this class soon, and i'd like
    > ruby to get there too.. (and i trust matz not to cripple the language to get
    > there)
    >
    > emmanuel
    >
    >


    I certainly would probably rather do it in C# then Java. It's
    interesting in the 2.0 spec for C# they are adding yield symantics,
    anonymous method blocks and generics. But the first two allow all the
    iteration style of Ruby that is so nice. In terms of a typed language I
    don't mind C# that much, it's alot more logical then Java. I have many
    bones to pick with Microsoft, but they did fix alot of the stupid
    problems in Java. I think it's an acceptable language.

    Of course, I like lots of languages so, that's just me. Ruby is my
    favorite at the moment, I just have room in my head to like more then
    one. I would like however to see Ruby more mainstream as well.

    It actually might be interesting to push Ruby in the academic world,
    though sometimes I dispair that teaching an object oriented language
    first confuses many of the introductory programmers who haven't
    programmed at all before. But still it might be a little more
    approachable then Scheme for some, since they syntax isn't quite so
    foreign. From the acedemic world though you might be able to bridge to
    the industry. Just a thought.

    We definitely more complete docs on lots of things though, that is my
    main problem with Ruby. There are lots of things I know I can do,
    without duplicating work, but since I can't find docs on it, it's
    difficult to do. The push for RDoc is great, but I still have the same
    complaints about it that I have of Javadoc, it generally doesn't give
    some sort of example for each function, class in the library. I learn
    far more from an example of code use that encompasses a wide part of the
    library then a list of functions I can call in the library. The 2nd is
    great, but it only works if you know how to use it already. Fix the
    documentation and I think ruby will certainly spring ahead.

    Charles Comstock
     
    Charles Comstock, Feb 1, 2004
    #15
  16. Documentation approaches (was: Python 25 times as popular as Ruby !?)

    [Charles Comstock:]
    > I certainly would probably rather do it in C# then Java. It's
    > interesting in the 2.0 spec for C# they are adding yield symantics,
    > anonymous method blocks and generics. But the first two allow all the
    > iteration style of Ruby that is so nice. In terms of a typed language I
    > don't mind C# that much, it's alot more logical then Java. I have many
    > bones to pick with Microsoft, but they did fix alot of the stupid
    > problems in Java. I think it's an acceptable language.


    Thanks for the report. C# sounds more interesting than it used to. I
    frequently hear from friends that it's a decent language, a tolerable
    platform, and has awful (wait for it) documentation.

    > [...]


    > We definitely more complete docs on lots of things though, that is my
    > main problem with Ruby. There are lots of things I know I can do,
    > without duplicating work, but since I can't find docs on it, it's
    > difficult to do. The push for RDoc is great, but I still have the same
    > complaints about it that I have of Javadoc, it generally doesn't give
    > some sort of example for each function, class in the library. I learn
    > far more from an example of code use that encompasses a wide part of the
    > library then a list of functions I can call in the library. The 2nd is
    > great, but it only works if you know how to use it already. Fix the
    > documentation and I think ruby will certainly spring ahead.


    I fully agree on all counts. I'll just mention, though, that RDoc
    actually encourages introductory/usage/example documentation, *so long as
    the developer wants to write it*. For example:

    * http://extensions.rubyforge.org/

    The *first thing you see* (an important consideration for people looking
    at an RDoc screen for the first time) is a description of the project,
    installation, usage, technical information, links, etc.

    * http://www.ruby-doc.org/stdlib/libdoc/pathname/rdoc/index.html

    Here, the first thing you see is a brief description of the 'pathname'
    Ruby standard library. It could use a one-paragraph description and usage
    example to help the casual browser (person, not software) decide whether
    they're interested. However, the most important thing is the prominent
    "For documentation, see class Pathname [linked]", which contains intro,
    examples, and a method catalogue.

    RDoc was certainly not a hinderance to creating decent documentation for
    the 'pathname' library!

    These examples serve as guidelines for me when creating new documentation.

    Cheers,
    Gavin
     
    Gavin Sinclair, Feb 2, 2004
    #16
  17. Lothar Scholz

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <>, Dan Doel <> wrote:
    >Lothar Scholz wrote:
    >
    >>The result is a real fiasco for ruby in some areas.
    >>

    >Why is this a fiasco?


    I don't think fiasco is the right word.

    >
    >Why must Ruby be far more known than Python?
    >
    >We here know it and like it. I'm sure if other people ask us our opinion
    >on a good
    >language, we'll suggest Ruby.
    >
    >But why should it matter if Ruby is more known than Python or Java or C
    >or whatever?
    >
    >If you like it, use it. If you don't, don't. One needn't worry so much
    >about what other
    >people are doing.
    >
    >After all, Ruby isn't a religion, and it isn't in a contest with other
    >languages.
    >


    I would tend to agree with you, but I'll present counter argument for the
    sake of discussion.

    Three things: Critical Mass, mindshare and perception.

    If a language reaches Critial Mass (meaning that it has gathered some
    number N users [I don't pretend to define N here]) it will tend to develop
    faster. More libraries will be developed more quickly. More
    documentation will be developed more quickly. More books will be
    published about it. Many hands make the work lighter.
    Perl reached critical mass years ago. Python is probably close to getting
    there (maybe it's already there?)

    Which leads to mindshare. At some point the language gains mindshare such
    that if you mention the name of the language to a non-user of the
    language or technically inclined manager chances are that they've at least
    heard of it.

    The perception of said language among management types (for example) will
    tend to be that it is at least 'real' - as in usable for real projects. A
    person recommending said language will encounter less resistance to using
    that language on a new project.


    I suggest that in the US at least, Ruby suffers from a perception problem.
    We know that Ruby is up to the task for developing large, critical
    applications. Some of us have used it in a commercial setting for
    developing just those types of apps and we've been successful. However,
    outside of our community the perception is that Ruby is mostly a hobby
    language. We of course know that that perception isn't reality, but how
    do we change that perception?

    Also, the perception out on the 'street' is that Ruby and Python play in
    the same space and to some extent this is true. Given that perception,
    you find some people wondering why Ruby exists in the language
    'marketplace' (they think it's just redundant - see Bruce Eckel's comments
    about Ruby). Here again, we in the Ruby community know that Ruby isn't
    redundant, but how do we convince people outside the community? I think
    it mostly comes down to convincing someone to actually use both languages
    for a few days solving some real-world problems - when you actually do
    that you get a very different 'feeling' from each of the languages. Problem
    is it's difficult to quantify a
    'feeling'. I'm not suggesting that everyone who does this sort of
    comparison between the two languages will come down on the side of Ruby,
    however, I suspect there would be more of an even split instead of 25:1 in
    favor of Python (or whatever it actually is).

    So how do we get to critical mass? It's a chicken-or-egg situation.
    "Well, the Ruby community is a lot smaller than the Python community, so
    I'll go with Python" I hear that a lot. It's not really based on merit
    (as we would hope). There's an old saying that goes "To him who has
    much, much more will be given" and we see that this is often the
    case. There's also an old proverb that says "The race isn't
    always to the swiftest"; we've seen that be the case over and over in
    technology whether it's betamax vs vhs or Mac vs Microsoft, often the
    inferior technology wins. Sure, we think Ruby is a superior language,
    but that doesn't guarantee widespread acceptance.

    I would also suggest that if we don't get to a certain level of mindshare
    that we'll never get to critical mass and if so Ruby will always be an
    also-ran in the OO scripting langauge arena. It will be remembered as a
    footnote somewhere: "Ruby - an object oriented scripting language which
    borrowed from diverse sources including SmallTalk, Perl and Scheme. It
    had a small devoted following and even many outside of it's small
    community thought it had potential, unfortunately it didn't gain enough
    developers... blah, blah".

    So, yes, we like Ruby here in our little community, and I even hear some
    people outside of our little community give kudos to the language, but
    we're probably not growing fast enough to escape our 'gravity well'.

    I don't want to be all pessimistic. I'm seeing some signs of movement.
    In the last month I've proposed Ruby for a new project for a large
    corporation that I'm doing a contract for. It's been a bit of a sell
    because most people still haven't heard of it, but it's been easier than
    it was in the past. So at this point it looks like I'll be getting paid
    to program in Ruby again and that's a very good thing.

    So, again, how do we get mindshare? You're right, Ruby isn't a religion,
    it's a language we like around here on clr and we'd like to see it used in
    more places so we can get to use it in more places and because we tend to
    think it would be beneficial for a lot of projects.

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Feb 2, 2004
    #17
  18. Lothar Scholz

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <>, Dan Doel <> wrote:
    >Michael campbell wrote:
    >
    >> No one said that.

    >
    >
    >Yes, I was exaggerating for effect. :)
    >
    >> If it doesn't grow, it will eventually die.

    >
    >Will it? Is Smalltalk still growing today?


    Squeak seems to be building some excitement...

    >It probably hasn't grown
    >for quite some time, yet it's still around if you want to learn it.
    >How about Eiffel? People are even moving away from C and C++, but I
    >doubt they'll be dead for many years to come.
    >
    >In any case (and this is a reply to several posts, not just yours),
    >Ruby will get popular some day. Or maybe it won't, and we'll either
    >continue to talk about it here and use it from time to time just
    >because it's a nice language, or we'll move on to something else.
    >The world will go on.
    >


    Yes it will.

    >What we don't need to do is organize a big campaign to get Ruby
    >awareness up.


    So Ruby awareness will just grow on it's own without any effort from us?
    It'll just happen? I don't think so.

    >We don't need to contact big players like IBM and
    >whoever to push Ruby for all sorts of programming -- "Look, it
    >was made for scripting but you should use it for OS programming and
    >high speed graphics too!"


    I don't think anyone is contacting big players and proposing that Ruby be
    used for things it's not suited for, and they shouldn't.
    But what about proposing Ruby for things that it _is_ good for?


    >We don't need to go into Slashdot stories
    >or forums about other languages and post messages going "Ruby rox!
    >Go check it out!"


    No, but why not visit other forums and make intelligent comments about
    Ruby (backing them up with facts about the language). I think there are
    many opportunities to do this in an appropriate way. Nobody's going to
    pay much attention to a post on a forum that says "You should use Ruby
    because it rox!", but if you suggest why Ruby makes sense for the given
    application space it will be received positively.

    >
    >Everyone hates evangelists except for those who are already in the
    >religion. They get offended that you're implying your beliefs are
    >better than theirs. If someone's curious about Ruby, or wants a
    >language suggestion, tell them to check it out, but don't become
    >an evangelist.


    It all depends on how the evangelizing is done. I would submit that we
    _do_ need Ruby evangelists, but they need to evangelize 'nicely' and
    intelligently. I know that a few years back there was an article going
    around about how language evangelism is just terrible bad and must be
    avoided at all costs, but I wonder if it caused us to go too far in the
    other direction. "I'm not going to even mention Ruby as an option because
    I don't want to be seen as an evangelist". The more people hear about
    Ruby, the more likely it is that they'll try it.

    We've all seen plenty of examples of superior commercial products that
    died due to poor marketing.

    So please _do_ write articles, post messages to other forums and even to
    Slashdot. If we aim to be invisible, we will be.

    >
    >In the mean time, posts like, "Python is 25 times more popular than
    >Ruby" or "Ruby needs Python indenting to be popular!" just waste time.
    >Ruby will either get there, or it won't, based on whether it's worthy
    >or not. Don't worry so much about how long it takes.
    >


    Some of us have been waiting longer than others...

    bottom line:
    I'd like to be able to recommend Ruby for work projects and not get
    'never heard of it' comments and questions about where would they find
    Ruby programmers if I were hit by a bus. I'd like to hear, "Ruby,
    excellent suggestion, go with it". Right now that's not the case - it's
    an uphill battle, but sometimes we do win.

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, Feb 2, 2004
    #18
  19. Lothar Scholz

    Dan Doel Guest

    Okay, we'd like to use Ruby at work. For this, Ruby needs
    critical mass.

    Threads like this don't really help Ruby gain mass. What
    should we do? I don't think an aggressive Ruby marketing
    campaign is in order, unless someone wants to spend lots
    of money.

    What can the Ruby community really do except continue to
    write Ruby code? RubyForge says it hosts 152 projects.
    As people write more Ruby code, more people will come and
    write more Ruby code and so on. Ruby may gain critical
    mass in the future. It just isn't there yet.

    So, I think that the Ruby community is already doing all
    it can to help Ruby gain critical mass. Did Python gain
    mindshare via marketing or simply by people writing code
    to demonstrate its viability (I don't know)? Simply
    remarking that Ruby doesn't have critical mass yet or
    that Python is more popular than Ruby isn't particularly
    productive (I know it's the truth, but it doesn't do
    anything to solve the problem).

    - Dan
     
    Dan Doel, Feb 2, 2004
    #19
  20. Hello Dan,

    Monday, February 2, 2004, 6:00:37 AM, you wrote:

    DD> Okay, we'd like to use Ruby at work. For this, Ruby needs
    DD> critical mass.

    DD> Threads like this don't really help Ruby gain mass. What
    DD> should we do? I don't think an aggressive Ruby marketing
    DD> campaign is in order, unless someone wants to spend lots
    DD> of money.

    DD> What can the Ruby community really do except continue to
    DD> write Ruby code? RubyForge says it hosts 152 projects.
    DD> As people write more Ruby code, more people will come and
    DD> write more Ruby code and so on. Ruby may gain critical
    DD> mass in the future. It just isn't there yet.

    Whats about cooperation instead of competition in the ruby world ?
    The raa-installer vs. ruby-gems is one of the places where energy is
    spend that could be used better. I also see lots of libraries in
    competition to each other but not in competition to some python/perl
    libraries, simply because they are to weak to be a competitor.

    If ruby is so a superior OO language, why is it so complicated to
    extend/change an already existing library ?

    The Ruby-Gem thread was one of the reasons why i started looking at
    the statistics on sourceforge.

    --
    Best regards,
    Lothar mailto:
     
    Lothar Scholz, Feb 2, 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. =?Utf-8?B?bWF2cmlja18xMDE=?=

    SetAuthCookie works some times and fails some times?

    =?Utf-8?B?bWF2cmlja18xMDE=?=, Mar 23, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    569
    =?Utf-8?B?bWF2cmlja18xMDE=?=
    Mar 23, 2006
  2. Brett C.
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,146
    Greg Ewing
    Aug 13, 2004
  3. Mike C. Fletcher
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    373
    richard
    Aug 10, 2004
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    365
  5. Fredrik Lundh
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    402
    John Salerno
    Apr 2, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page