Python vs Ruby

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Lethalman, Jan 9, 2005.

  1. Lethalman

    Lethalman Guest

    (sorry for my poor English)
    Hello,
    i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.

    I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    because i really would like to try the ruby language!

    Bye!
     
    Lethalman, Jan 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:11:24 +0900, Lethalman <> wrote:
    > (sorry for my poor English)
    > Hello,
    > i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.


    I might be repeating a lot of stuff that's already been written in the
    past about this, but since you asked, here are the two _main_ reasons:
    * Ruby is relatively new compared to Python
    * Most of Ruby's initial docs/mls were in Japanese

    Things are changing now, of course.

    I don't see other reasons, actually. It'd be interesting to see if
    others point out other reasons. :-w

    > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    >
    > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > because i really would like to try the ruby language!
    >
    > Bye!
    >
    >



    --
    Premshree Pillai
    http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
     
    Premshree Pillai, Jan 9, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lethalman

    Lethalman Guest

    Luc Heinrich wrote:
    > Premshree Pillai <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I don't see other reasons, actually.

    >
    >
    > Here's one: Ruby is better than Python, but the industry has decided
    > that worse is better, so Python wins.
    >
    > Another one: Bruce Eckel (for whom I had lots of respect) has said that
    > Ruby is not worth learning compared to Python (which is why I lost all
    > the respect I had for him, poof, instantly gone, bye bye), so Python
    > wins again.
    >
    > Oh, and another one: Python users don't like to admit that they made the
    > wrong choice, so they stick with their inferior solution, so Python wins
    > again.
    >
    > Do you need more ? :)
    >


    (sorry for my poor English)

    I do agree with everything you said, escpecially this:

    > Oh, and another one: Python users don't like to admit that they made the
    > wrong choice, so they stick with their inferior solution, so Python wins
    > again.


    However i should say choosing ruby whould be like using a "deprecated
    language". It has a low support, development and many other reason that
    programmers (and not only pythonist) don't choose ruby.

    I think if ruby become a very known-language python could go back to
    guido var rossum. The only way is to make great & original projects,
    then vendors MUST implement ruby in their products.

    Please, phrases to let me start ruby programming? :) I'm making a
    medium-big project with python (a powerful and very custmizable-modular
    ircd) and i know ruby can do more than python, but i really don't want
    to change (easy-to-use matters)...
     
    Lethalman, Jan 9, 2005
    #3
  4. Lethalman

    Luc Heinrich Guest

    Premshree Pillai <> wrote:

    > I don't see other reasons, actually.


    Here's one: Ruby is better than Python, but the industry has decided
    that worse is better, so Python wins.

    Another one: Bruce Eckel (for whom I had lots of respect) has said that
    Ruby is not worth learning compared to Python (which is why I lost all
    the respect I had for him, poof, instantly gone, bye bye), so Python
    wins again.

    Oh, and another one: Python users don't like to admit that they made the
    wrong choice, so they stick with their inferior solution, so Python wins
    again.

    Do you need more ? :)

    --
    Luc Heinrich -
     
    Luc Heinrich, Jan 9, 2005
    #4
  5. * Lethalman (Jan 09, 2005 17:20):
    > Hello, i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features,
    > however it doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.


    Please, oh please look at the ruby-talk archives before asking questions
    like these. We have had a countless number of threads on this subject
    already. There's nothing to be gained by this discussion anymore.

    Anyway, your statement is a bit ambigious. Do you mean supported as in
    "used and _endorsed_ by a lot of people" or as in "receiving a lot of
    attention from its developers"? Either way, I think that you haven't
    seen the whole picture. It is both actively used and actively
    developed.

    > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.


    Yes, yes...and Java is perhaps the most used language in the industry at
    the moment. If you are required to use Python, then do...you could do
    far worse. However, if you're doing things for your own pleasure, you
    shouldn't be limiting yourself to using whatever language seems most
    popular at the moment.

    > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > because i really would like to try the ruby language!


    I really don't understand what you mean here. Python has been around
    longer than Ruby, so it has gained a larger user-base. It is also much
    closer related to Algol-type languages (such as C) than Ruby is. Thus,
    many users of Python are using it since it fits their mental model
    better. This isn't to say that Ruby isn't as usable, probably the
    opposite in fact. Ruby brings ideas from many programming lanugages
    together, taking the best of many paradigms; you can find bits of Lisp,
    SmallTalk, Perl, C, sh, and even Python in Ruby. I don't understand why
    you can't use a language simply because ESR (Eric S. Raymond) uses
    Python,
    nikolai

    --
    ::: name: Nikolai Weibull :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
    ::: born: Chicago, IL USA :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden :::
    ::: page: www.pcppopper.org :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
    main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
     
    Nikolai Weibull, Jan 9, 2005
    #5
  6. Lethalman

    James Britt Guest

    Lethalman wrote:
    > (sorry for my poor English)
    > Hello,
    > i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    >
    > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > because i really would like to try the ruby language!



    Ruby is moving up the charts.

    Regardless of its popularity, you can try the Ruby language and decide
    for yourself whether it deserves more attention.

    If everyone waited until something was popular before using it we'd
    probably get stuck using languages owned by Sun and Microsoft.


    James
     
    James Britt, Jan 9, 2005
    #6
  7. * Luc Heinrich (Jan 09, 2005 17:40):
    > > I don't see other reasons, actually.


    > Here's one: Ruby is better than Python, but the industry has decided
    > that worse is better, so Python wins.


    Ah, a Peter Gabriel-ism ;-),
    nikolai

    --
    ::: name: Nikolai Weibull :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
    ::: born: Chicago, IL USA :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden :::
    ::: page: www.pcppopper.org :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
    main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
     
    Nikolai Weibull, Jan 9, 2005
    #7
  8. Lethalman

    Joao Pedrosa Guest

    Hi,

    On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:11:24 +0900, Lethalman <> wrote:
    > (sorry for my poor English)
    > Hello,
    > i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    >
    > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > because i really would like to try the ruby language!


    Besides what the other guys have already said that I agree with, I
    think Python has had better support on Windows and they have an
    integrated IDE which supports auto-completion. On Windows, many times,
    people try out Cygwin out of despair. :) Another point is that Python
    seems faster (performance-wise) for some tasks.

    So, I don't blame the Pythonists for choosing the wrong language...
    :) They are partially right, at least. We have a better language,
    some very nice libraries and a great community.

    Cheers,
    Joao
     
    Joao Pedrosa, Jan 9, 2005
    #8
  9. On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:36:22 +0900, Luc Heinrich <> wrote:
    > Premshree Pillai <> wrote:
    >
    > > I don't see other reasons, actually.

    >
    > Here's one: Ruby is better than Python, but the industry has decided
    > that worse is better, so Python wins.


    I think you are being too critical about Python. I use Ruby as well as
    Python for my work. Whenever I make a presentation about Ruby, I often
    draw similarities between Ruby and Python. There are not many _major_
    differences between the two languages from the POV of a language user.

    >
    > Another one: Bruce Eckel (for whom I had lots of respect) has said that
    > Ruby is not worth learning compared to Python (which is why I lost all
    > the respect I had for him, poof, instantly gone, bye bye), so Python
    > wins again.


    That was in a FAQ, right? That comment doesn't exist anymore, I think.
    Maybe he changed his views or something. :)

    >
    > Oh, and another one: Python users don't like to admit that they made the
    > wrong choice, so they stick with their inferior solution, so Python wins
    > again.
    >
    > Do you need more ? :)
    >
    > --
    > Luc Heinrich -
    >
    >



    --
    Premshree Pillai
    http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
     
    Premshree Pillai, Jan 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Lethalman wrote:

    > (sorry for my poor English)
    > Hello,
    > i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    >
    > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > because i really would like to try the ruby language!


    I'm not sure what that means, but if you're arguing about adaption,
    we're doing well and even more well. You can help us with doing yet even
    more more well by starting to use it today. You won't regret it.
     
    Florian Gross, Jan 9, 2005
    #10
  11. Lethalman wrote:

    > However i should say choosing ruby whould be like using a "deprecated
    > language". It has a low support, development and many other reason that
    > programmers (and not only pythonist) don't choose ruby.


    Nope, that's not true. I see quite a lot of development and support.
    Especially from the community.

    > Please, phrases to let me start ruby programming? :) I'm making a
    > medium-big project with python (a powerful and very custmizable-modular
    > ircd) and i know ruby can do more than python, but i really don't want
    > to change (easy-to-use matters)...


    Ruby *is* easy to use.
     
    Florian Gross, Jan 9, 2005
    #11
  12. On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:51:57 +0900, Joao Pedrosa <> wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:11:24 +0900, Lethalman <> wrote:
    > > (sorry for my poor English)
    > > Hello,
    > > i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > > doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    > > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    > >
    > > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > > because i really would like to try the ruby language!

    >
    > Besides what the other guys have already said that I agree with, I
    > think Python has had better support on Windows and they have an
    > integrated IDE which supports auto-completion. On Windows, many times,
    > people try out Cygwin out of despair. :) Another point is that Python
    > seems faster (performance-wise) for some tasks.


    And Ruby is faster (performance-wise) for some _other_ tasks. :) I
    don't think it's worth comparing the performances of two languages
    generally. They should -- and are -- compared on a task basis.

    Actually, if you see the list archives, folks from the Python ml tend
    to say something to the effect of: "Python is generally faster than
    Ruby"; and folks here tend to say the other way. :D

    >
    > So, I don't blame the Pythonists for choosing the wrong language...
    > :) They are partially right, at least. We have a better language,
    > some very nice libraries and a great community.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Joao
    >
    >



    --
    Premshree Pillai
    http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
     
    Premshree Pillai, Jan 9, 2005
    #12
  13. Lethalman

    Luc Heinrich Guest

    Premshree Pillai <> wrote:

    > I think you are being too critical about Python.


    You're probably right. My opinion on Python is just based on my personal
    experience with it: using Python has the same effect on me then using
    Windows, it makes me want to projectile vomit my breakfast (or lunch or
    dinner depending on the time of day I am doing this). So yeah, my
    comment might have a little bias ;)

    > There are not many _major_
    > differences between the two languages from the POV of a language user.


    Well, my opinion is that Ruby has been designed, while Python has been
    tinkered, and this makes one hell of a difference from the POV of a
    language user, because quite frankly, it shows. :>

    --
    Luc Heinrich -
     
    Luc Heinrich, Jan 9, 2005
    #13
  14. * Premshree Pillai (Jan 09, 2005 18:00):
    > > Another one: Bruce Eckel (for whom I had lots of respect) has said
    > > that Ruby is not worth learning compared to Python (which is why I
    > > lost all the respect I had for him, poof, instantly gone, bye bye),
    > > so Python wins again.


    > That was in a FAQ, right? That comment doesn't exist anymore, I think.
    > Maybe he changed his views or something. :)


    Or may he's just a smug coward?
    nikolai

    --
    ::: name: Nikolai Weibull :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
    ::: born: Chicago, IL USA :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden :::
    ::: page: www.pcppopper.org :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
    main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
     
    Nikolai Weibull, Jan 9, 2005
    #14
  15. On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 02:11:29 +0900, Luc Heinrich <> wrote:
    > Premshree Pillai <> wrote:
    >
    > > I think you are being too critical about Python.

    >
    > You're probably right. My opinion on Python is just based on my personal
    > experience with it: using Python has the same effect on me then using
    > Windows, it makes me want to projectile vomit my breakfast (or lunch or


    Boy, do you hate Python or what! I haven't seen Ruby users so critical
    about Python.

    > dinner depending on the time of day I am doing this). So yeah, my
    > comment might have a little bias ;)
    >
    > > There are not many _major_
    > > differences between the two languages from the POV of a language user.

    >
    > Well, my opinion is that Ruby has been designed, while Python has been
    > tinkered, and this makes one hell of a difference from the POV of a
    > language user, because quite frankly, it shows. :>
    >
    > --
    > Luc Heinrich -
    >
    >



    --
    Premshree Pillai
    http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
     
    Premshree Pillai, Jan 9, 2005
    #15
  16. Lethalman

    Jeff Wood Guest

    --------------010209040500070807020300
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Premshree Pillai wrote:

    >On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:36:22 +0900, Luc Heinrich <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Another one: Bruce Eckel (for whom I had lots of respect) has said that
    >>Ruby is not worth learning compared to Python (which is why I lost all
    >>the respect I had for him, poof, instantly gone, bye bye), so Python
    >>wins again.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >That was in a FAQ, right? That comment doesn't exist anymore, I think.
    >Maybe he changed his views or something. :)
    >

    To all interested parties:

    I've corresponded with Mr. Eckel directly about Ruby ( recently ... like
    November '04 )

    His response was that he had looked at it a "years ago" and that it
    seemed "very perlish". So, he stated that he's "been following it
    peripherally".

    He also stated "If I get a chance to take a tutorial, I will probably
    try to do so."

    I'm only giving snippets because I want to protect Mr. Eckel's privacy
    as much as I can.

    Since this email, I have sent further email including at least what *I*
    consider to be the top 3 tutorials for Ruby ( online )....

    Pickaxe Online ...
    Why's Poignant Guide ...
    and, the Tutorial included in the standard documentation.

    Anyways, there's the $0.02 I know about this topic. Hope it helps somebody.

    j.

    --------------010209040500070807020300--
     
    Jeff Wood, Jan 9, 2005
    #16
  17. Lethalman

    Luc Heinrich Guest

    Premshree Pillai <> wrote:

    > Boy, do you hate Python or what!


    Just a little... ;)

    --
    Luc Heinrich -
     
    Luc Heinrich, Jan 9, 2005
    #17
  18. Lethalman ha scritto:
    > (sorry for my poor English)
    > Hello,
    > i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    > I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    >
    > I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > because i really would like to try the ruby language!


    it is doing, it seem, I think this thing was true for pythonvs perl and
    for perl vs tcl and maybe tcl vs sh..
    just wait some more :)

    Anyway, just wanted to notice you that there is an italian ruby user
    group (I think I saw you con i.c.l.py) that you can from at
    http://ada2.unipv.it/ruby
    we have a low traffic mailing list but if you ask for something you get
    an answer quite quickly ;)
     
    gabriele renzi, Jan 9, 2005
    #18
  19. Hello Lethalman,

    L> (sorry for my poor English)
    L> Hello,
    L> i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    L> doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    L> I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.

    L> I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    L> because i really would like to try the ruby language!

    At the moment i would say that the language is in some aspects better
    then python. But the current implementation is not as good as the language
    itself.

    Ruby does not have native threading, makeing it a serious problem for
    interactive GUI applications. Here Python is in almost all cases still
    the better choice.

    Ruby has problems with being embedded into other programs, especially
    when they are multithreaded but also when they must use two
    independent interpreters (like some application servers).

    If your application needs to be fast then normally ruby and python are
    not a good choice. But it is much easier to improve the performance of
    python then ruby, because there are a few more sophisticated
    technologies for python then for ruby.

    If this 3 reasons are not important to your application then choose
    ruby otherwise use another language.


    --
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
     
    Lothar Scholz, Jan 9, 2005
    #19
  20. On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 04:06:40 +0900, Lothar Scholz
    <> wrote:
    > Hello Lethalman,
    >
    > L> (sorry for my poor English)
    > L> Hello,
    > L> i'm a pythonist but i like very much some ruby features, however it
    > L> doesn't seem to be very supported at all like Python.
    > L> I never programmed in ruby, because i python is more used.
    >
    > L> I would like to know why ruby doesn't "take the fly" like Python did,
    > L> because i really would like to try the ruby language!
    >
    > At the moment i would say that the language is in some aspects better


    Could you elaborate on those aspects?

    > then python. But the current implementation is not as good as the language
    > itself.
    >
    > Ruby does not have native threading, makeing it a serious problem for
    > interactive GUI applications. Here Python is in almost all cases still
    > the better choice.
    >
    > Ruby has problems with being embedded into other programs, especially
    > when they are multithreaded but also when they must use two
    > independent interpreters (like some application servers).
    >
    > If your application needs to be fast then normally ruby and python are
    > not a good choice. But it is much easier to improve the performance of
    > python then ruby, because there are a few more sophisticated
    > technologies for python then for ruby.
    >
    > If this 3 reasons are not important to your application then choose
    > ruby otherwise use another language.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    > Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    > CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
    >
    >



    --
    Premshree Pillai
    http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree
     
    Premshree Pillai, Jan 9, 2005
    #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. Christian Seberino
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    922
  2. Ed Leafe
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    330
    Peter Hansen
    Nov 2, 2004
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    237
  4. Norjee
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    544
    Lyndon Samson
    Aug 3, 2005
  5. anne001
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    591
Loading...

Share This Page