Ruby Philosophy

[Darren Crotchett]

I'm trying to get a feel for the philosophical differences between Smalltalk,
Ruby and Python. I realize that many of the technical differences are only
going to come from hands on experience. And, I'm sure they all have their
good and bad points. I'm just trying to get some idea of why some people
choose one of these languages over the other.

Without any point of reference, this could be a difficult question to answer.
Therefore, I thought it might be more helpful if I gave a little background
info on my experience with those languages and my level of experience in
general.

First, let me say that I am a 4th year CS student (with 3 classes left). I've
taken classes in C, C++, Ada and Smalltalk. I have done just enough C++ to
come to the conclusion that I don't like it. Ada is OK (until I get to
generics), if I have to compile something. But, Smalltalk seems to make the
most sense to me out of the languages that I've been exposed to so far.

Regarding the 3 languages in question, here is how I summarize them:

Smalltalk. I like it. Smalltalk feels "natural". It seems very intuitive,
consistent and predictable. After learning the basics, I could often guess
how to do stuff. But, I get the impression that the Smalltalk community is
shrinking (or at least, stagnate).

In class, we used Cincom's VisualWorks. VisualWorks seems like it has a lot
of nice features. But, it also has too many quirks that get on my nerves to
the extent that I couldn't actually use it unless those oddities were fixed.
I do like Smalltalk, though.

Python. Its strength seems to be its popularity. To me, however, it really
seems to lack consistency. I've read quite a bit about the Python way of
doing things. Yet, for the life of me, I can't seem to get the hang of it.
For example, I may have the wrong idea, but one thing that bugs me is the way
that "self" must be included as a parameter to the __init__ constructor
function in a class. That seems weird to me. Who else is going to call that
__init__? And, I can never seem to remember if it's str.length() or
length(str). It's like Python wants to appeal to people more familiar with C
so as to not scare off newbies. Maybe it's just me. Maybe after awhile I'll
see the consistency.

Ruby. I've been reading up on Ruby, a little. I just bought the Programming
Ruby book. It seems to be a lot like Smalltalk. I'm thinking that I like it
better than Python because it seems a lot more consistent like Smalltalk.
But, then I question, if it is good because it is a lot like Smalltalk, why
not just use Smalltalk? I'm sure there must be some good answers to this
question.

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?

TIA,
Darren

 

[gabriele renzi]

Darren Crotchett ha scritto:

Ruby. I've been reading up on Ruby, a little. I just bought the Programming
Ruby book. It seems to be a lot like Smalltalk. I'm thinking that I like it
better than Python because it seems a lot more consistent like Smalltalk.
But, then I question, if it is good because it is a lot like Smalltalk, why
not just use Smalltalk? I'm sure there must be some good answers to this
question.

just my two eurocents: I try to learn Smalltalk[0] from time to time,
but It does not fit my mind perfectly, mainly due to three things.

First, I think Smalltalk is more predictable and more consistent than
ruby, but, somewhat, I don't want that kind of consistency (i.e.
#ifTrue: vs algol-like if).

The other point is the IDE integration/image based development. I can't
feel good with it, and actually, I think I really felt comfortable just
with GNU/Smalltalk because of the lack of a GUI environment(when I last
tried.. I think they have one now). Notice this is just me, I
understand. We seem to get a lot of Smalltalkish stuff in ruby in this
days (i.e. the breakpoint library somewhat feels like debug-and-continue)

Last, ruby has the 'scripting' thing, I mean, the ease of use for one
liners and quick scripts, the coarse grained library and the general
feel of "getting the job done". Just compare what Array in ruby does
with all the collection classes in Smalltalk.[1]

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?

I really think so, and I thing when the "Facets of Ruby" book series
from the PragProgs will come out it will grow further

TIA,
Darren

HTH.

[0] Avi, thanks for teaching me how to write it

[1] I'd love to have more mixins related to base classes in ruby (i.e.
Map/Association, Stringish, Readable/Writable/Seekable,) they definitely
do too much stuff becoming almost not-inheritable :/

 

[Thursday]

Darren Crotchett wrote:
[snip]

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?

TIA,
Darren

Growth can be measured in a number of ways.

I'll just mention 2 that come immediately to mind.

1. number of books on the topic

The lack of English books and documentation were Ruby's greatest area of
weakness compared to other languages. About 5 years ago, I'd be
hard-pressed to find a single Ruby book written in English.

But that has changed. We now have Programming Ruby 2nd Ed. which is hot
off the press. More well-known series of tech books now include Ruby
such as "Ruby in a Nutshell" and "Teach Yourself Ruby in 21 days". At
this rate, I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Ruby Bible" and "Ruby for
Dummies" soon. There are at least a half-dozen English books on Ruby
now, all published within the past few years.

When I visit Borders bookstore, I still don't see Ruby books on the
shelves (only one or two Ruby books--and infrequently).

2. number of people in the irc channel

Another decent indicator is the number of people in the irc channel. I
think the #ruby-lang channel has steadily grown this year. I'm guessing
it'll hit around 200 people before this time next year if it continues
growing at this rate.

Armed with better English documentation, growth rate should accelerate.
I don't know the status of other non-Japenese docs but I hope they
improve as well.

 

[Stefan Schmiedl]

Smalltalk. I like it. Smalltalk feels "natural". It seems very intuitive,
consistent and predictable. After learning the basics, I could often guess
how to do stuff. But, I get the impression that the Smalltalk community is
shrinking (or at least, stagnate).

Ruby feels like Smalltalk without IDE. To make up for that loss, you get
regular expressions. If you liked Smalltalk, you'll like Ruby. If you
liked the Unix-approach to things, too, you'll love Ruby.

__init__? And, I can never seem to remember if it's str.length() or
length(str).

Python started non-OO and still carries this burden with it. Ruby OTOH
was OO from the beginning.

Ruby. I've been reading up on Ruby, a little. I just bought the Programming
Ruby book. It seems to be a lot like Smalltalk. I'm thinking that I like it
better than Python because it seems a lot more consistent like Smalltalk.
But, then I question, if it is good because it is a lot like Smalltalk, why
not just use Smalltalk? I'm sure there must be some good answers to this
question.

You can do lots of things within the Smalltalk environment, in a very
natural and consistent way. It's a little bit harder if you have to
interface to the different philosophy behind OSes like Unix, where
everything is not an object, but a (text) file.

Ruby is well suited for such file-based environments. You won't have the
natural persistence that ST objects show within a saved image. But this
can be both curse and blessing.

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?

steady growth ...
s.

 

[Ralf Müller]

Am Dienstag, 28. Dezember 2004 09:02 schrieb Darren Crotchett:

I'm trying to get a feel for the philosophical differences between
Smalltalk, Ruby and Python. I realize that many of the technical
differences are only going to come from hands on experience. And, I'm sure
they all have their good and bad points. I'm just trying to get some idea
of why some people choose one of these languages over the other.

Without any point of reference, this could be a difficult question to
answer. Therefore, I thought it might be more helpful if I gave a little
background info on my experience with those languages and my level of
experience in general.

First, let me say that I am a 4th year CS student (with 3 classes left).
I've taken classes in C, C++, Ada and Smalltalk. I have done just enough
C++ to come to the conclusion that I don't like it. Ada is OK (until I get
to generics), if I have to compile something. But, Smalltalk seems to make
the most sense to me out of the languages that I've been exposed to so far.

Regarding the 3 languages in question, here is how I summarize them:

Smalltalk. I like it. Smalltalk feels "natural". It seems very
intuitive, consistent and predictable. After learning the basics, I could
often guess how to do stuff. But, I get the impression that the Smalltalk
community is shrinking (or at least, stagnate).

In class, we used Cincom's VisualWorks. VisualWorks seems like it has a
lot of nice features. But, it also has too many quirks that get on my
nerves to the extent that I couldn't actually use it unless those oddities
were fixed. I do like Smalltalk, though.

Python. Its strength seems to be its popularity. To me, however, it
really seems to lack consistency. I've read quite a bit about the Python
way of doing things. Yet, for the life of me, I can't seem to get the hang
of it. For example, I may have the wrong idea, but one thing that bugs me
is the way that "self" must be included as a parameter to the __init__
constructor function in a class. That seems weird to me. Who else is
going to call that __init__? And, I can never seem to remember if it's
str.length() or length(str). It's like Python wants to appeal to people
more familiar with C so as to not scare off newbies. Maybe it's just me.
Maybe after awhile I'll see the consistency.

Ruby. I've been reading up on Ruby, a little. I just bought the
Programming Ruby book. It seems to be a lot like Smalltalk. I'm thinking
that I like it better than Python because it seems a lot more consistent
like Smalltalk. But, then I question, if it is good because it is a lot
like Smalltalk, why not just use Smalltalk? I'm sure there must be some
good answers to this question.

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?

You're mixing different things:
1. for Smalltalk, you mentioned stagnation of the community: a fact, true or
false (or at least you're not satisfied)
2. for python, the popularity is good, but you get a bit annoyed, typing
strange commands: your feeling, and i know that, too.
3. for ruby: you're feeling, that it's quite near to smalltalk, so why not
smalltalk: Well:

Because, you posted that message?

to 1.: This list IS active and VERY helpfull (BTW: thanks a lot). so, if this
is the only point, forget smalltalk. But it's not, isn't it?
to 2.: ruby has such a nice grammar, that i believe, you could write poems
with it. I made the experience, that commands can be typed as I think they
can.
to 3.: Your gave the answer yourself: you're unhappy with it.

I think, you have to try ruby within something the other langs become odd.
Anyway, there is no way of telling you the advantages and disadvantages. It
seems to be something you feel.
This is not meant to be arrogant or slt. What you feel, is important, because
any language has an inner logic; and this logic should be your friend.

I tried C++, had a small Java-Project and felt that these langs do not fit to
my mind. Then i tried Perl and guess what...., Then I thougth Python would be
the best choice, but after a while i became disappointed whit it.

unfortunately my employer wants me to use bash, perl and php.
So, there is now way of using ruby in big projects. Therewith other members of
this list will be more helpfull.
But for all the tiny things, that'd waste hours and hours, I use ruby and get
them done in a few minutes (logfile analysis, code analysis, database
manipulation).

 

[Joao Pedrosa]

Hi,

I'm trying to get a feel for the philosophical differences between Smalltalk,
Ruby and Python. I realize that many of the technical differences are only
going to come from hands on experience. And, I'm sure they all have their
good and bad points. I'm just trying to get some idea of why some people
choose one of these languages over the other.

At least the word philosophy matches with Ruby. Ruby is that language
that when we don't use it, we miss it so hard. Don't forget the
supporting libraries. Ruby has some very nice libraries. Nice in the
sense that they work, they are licensed under the Ruby license, which
is a nice custom one, and Ruby as a C framework provides some nice
constructions for the C libraries, and finally, Ruby as a language
supports any library beautifully, shortly and powerfully.

The price for all the dynamic power of Ruby is that it's harder to
enable it with some tools (on the other hand, some other tools are
easier to build.) So if Ruby does not suit the project, we have to
look at other language to accomplish it. Or maybe try to bend the
project over to Ruby.

That's it. Enough of blah blah blah.

BTW, Python sucks.

Cheers,
Joao

 

[Robert Klemme]

Hi,



At least the word philosophy matches with Ruby. Ruby is that language
that when we don't use it, we miss it so hard.

Sounds like "addiction" would match fairly better than "philisophy"...
)

robert


PS: Yes, I'm addicted, too. ;-)

 

[gabriele renzi]

Thursday ha scritto:

Darren Crotchett wrote:
[snip]

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?
TIA,
Darren

Growth can be measured in a number of ways.

I'll just mention 2 that come immediately to mind.

1. number of books on the topic

The lack of English books and documentation were Ruby's greatest area of
weakness compared to other languages. About 5 years ago, I'd be
hard-pressed to find a single Ruby book written in English.

But that has changed. We now have Programming Ruby 2nd Ed. which is hot
off the press. More well-known series of tech books now include Ruby
such as "Ruby in a Nutshell" and "Teach Yourself Ruby in 21 days". At
this rate, I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Ruby Bible" and "Ruby for
Dummies" soon. There are at least a half-dozen English books on Ruby
now, all published within the past few years.

When I visit Borders bookstore, I still don't see Ruby books on the
shelves (only one or two Ruby books--and infrequently).

notice that there are books that do not have ruby in the cover but use
it inside, the first I can think of is 'code generation in action', but
I recall there were others.

 

[Premshree Pillai]

Measuring a language's performance is a difficult task. ML posts and suchlike.

TIOBE software maintains a language popularity index at
http://www.tiobe.com/tpci.htm Language popularity indices are not
accurate, but they give an idea.

For a recent conf, I needed data on Ruby's growth. Tiobe provided me
with some data. You can see a graph of Ruby's growth here:
http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree/44232.html

Thursday ha scritto:

Darren Crotchett wrote:
[snip]

Also, is the Ruby community experiencing a lot of growth or what?
TIA,
Darren

Growth can be measured in a number of ways.

I'll just mention 2 that come immediately to mind.

1. number of books on the topic

The lack of English books and documentation were Ruby's greatest area of
weakness compared to other languages. About 5 years ago, I'd be
hard-pressed to find a single Ruby book written in English.

But that has changed. We now have Programming Ruby 2nd Ed. which is hot
off the press. More well-known series of tech books now include Ruby
such as "Ruby in a Nutshell" and "Teach Yourself Ruby in 21 days". At
this rate, I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Ruby Bible" and "Ruby for
Dummies" soon. There are at least a half-dozen English books on Ruby
now, all published within the past few years.

When I visit Borders bookstore, I still don't see Ruby books on the
shelves (only one or two Ruby books--and infrequently).

notice that there are books that do not have ruby in the cover but use
it inside, the first I can think of is 'code generation in action', but
I recall there were others.

 

[gabriele renzi]

Premshree Pillai ha scritto:

Measuring a language's performance is a difficult task. ML posts and suchlike.

TIOBE software maintains a language popularity index at
http://www.tiobe.com/tpci.htm Language popularity indices are not
accurate, but they give an idea.

The tiobe index system is (in my little worth opinion) strange in many
ways, or I just never understood it (wich is quite possible).
Could someone explain me the query they are using? what does:
+"<language> programming" -tv
really mean?

For a recent conf, I needed data on Ruby's growth. Tiobe provided me
with some data. You can see a graph of Ruby's growth here:
http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree/44232.html

You just made recall this thread about ruby community growth, where you
can find reference to some google stats on "programming <language>" :
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/114496

PS
do I spamm^Whinted about ruby on your blog long time ago?

 

[Premshree Pillai]

Premshree Pillai ha scritto:

The tiobe index system is (in my little worth opinion) strange in many
ways, or I just never understood it (wich is quite possible).
Could someone explain me the query they are using? what does:
+"<language> programming" -tv

No idea what this "-tv" option is. I think I should ask the TIOBE
folks. IAC, the Tiobe index might seem strange and all, but don't you
think in most cases it seems to depict things correctly.

Well, at least it's true in the case of Java.

really mean?



You just made recall this thread about ruby community growth, where you
can find reference to some google stats on "programming <language>" :
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/114496

PS
do I spamm^Whinted about ruby on your blog long time ago?

Didn't get ya. Explain?

 

[gabriele renzi]

Premshree Pillai ha scritto:

Didn't get ya. Explain?

nothing important, I just recall a name like your and I have the feeling
I pointed out ruby in a comment to his blog. I may be wrong, anyway.

 

[darren]

Darren Crotchett ha scritto:

[ . . . snip . . . ]

First, I think Smalltalk is more predictable and more consistent than
ruby, but, somewhat, I don't want that kind of consistency (i.e.
#ifTrue: vs algol-like if).

I'm not familiar with algol other than the fact that it is an early language
that has had a heavy influence on later languages. But, that's all I know.
I like #ifTrue. I'm not sure if you were saying that you liked it or you
didn't. But, it makes sense to me.

The other point is the IDE integration/image based development. I can't
feel good with it, and actually, I think I really felt comfortable just
with GNU/Smalltalk because of the lack of a GUI environment(when I last
tried.. I think they have one now). Notice this is just me, I
understand. We seem to get a lot of Smalltalkish stuff in ruby in this
days (i.e. the breakpoint library somewhat feels like debug-and-continue)

I'm not a big GUI person. My preferred OS is Linux and my favorite editor is
vim. I used the VisualWorks IDE. But, I found it uncomfortable to use for
several reasons (like wheel mouse not working, the toolkit didn't behave like
my Gnome or KDE apps (must have been Tk or something)). If I were interested
in a GUI, it wouldn't be VisualWorks, today. When I finished this semester,
the first thing I did was to delete VisualWorks. Cincom seems like a great,
customer-oriented, company. But, I can't work in that IDE.

I really think so, and I thing when the "Facets of Ruby" book series
from the PragProgs will come out it will grow further

I don't really know why popularity is important. True. It means more bugs
found. But, I also think it suggests that if a programming language can
satisfy the masses, it might be worth investing some time in. But, the lack
of popularity doesn't mean the opposite. For example, during my educational
experience, the language that most appealed to me is Smalltalk. It's
probably also the least popular. I think people want a better programming
environment, but when it's available, they are just put off because it's too
different. It's a catch 22.

Darren

 

[darren]

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:02:21 +0900, [ . . . snip . . . ]
Ruby feels like Smalltalk without IDE. To make up for that loss, you get
regular expressions. If you liked Smalltalk, you'll like Ruby. If you
liked the Unix-approach to things, too, you'll love Ruby.

I prefer Unix. I like what I see, so far. I was just trying to get a feel
for the intangible.

Python started non-OO and still carries this burden with it. Ruby OTOH
was OO from the beginning.


You can do lots of things within the Smalltalk environment, in a very
natural and consistent way. It's a little bit harder if you have to
interface to the different philosophy behind OSes like Unix, where
everything is not an object, but a (text) file.

Ruby is well suited for such file-based environments. You won't have the
natural persistence that ST objects show within a saved image. But this
can be both curse and blessing.


steady growth ...
s.

Darren

 

[darren]

Am Dienstag, 28. Dezember 2004 09:02 schrieb Darren Crotchett:

[ . . . snip . . . ]

You're mixing different things:
1. for Smalltalk, you mentioned stagnation of the community: a fact, true
or false (or at least you're not satisfied)
2. for python, the popularity is good, but you get a bit annoyed, typing
strange commands: your feeling, and i know that, too.
3. for ruby: you're feeling, that it's quite near to smalltalk, so why not
smalltalk: Well:

Most of the replies seemed to focus on the very last question (about the
community's growth). Now, I wish I hadn't asked that. I don't think it's a
bad thing to be heavily influenced by a Smalltalk. I just figured that the
developers had some annoyances with several languages (including ST) and felt
they could do a better job. I was trying to figure out A) if that was the
case. B) how they improved it.

I have only programmed in Cincom's Smalltalk. I know there are other versions
(like GNU/Smalltalk and Squeak). One of the problems that I ran into was
that I couldn't always tell if I was programming in "Smalltalk" or "Cincom
Smalltalk". I didn't care for that. I didn't want to get hooked on a
proprietary way of doing things. So, I always wanted to know "is this
Smalltalk?" or "is this Cincom?". If I wanted proprietary, I would probably
be using C#.

Because, you posted that message?

huh ???

to 1.: This list IS active and VERY helpfull (BTW: thanks a lot). so, if
this is the only point, forget smalltalk. But it's not, isn't it?
to 2.: ruby has such a nice grammar, that i believe, you could write poems
with it. I made the experience, that commands can be typed as I think they
can.
to 3.: Your gave the answer yourself: you're unhappy with it.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

I think, you have to try ruby within something the other langs become odd.
Anyway, there is no way of telling you the advantages and disadvantages. It
seems to be something you feel.

I can understand that. I knew my question would be difficult to answer. As I
posted to someone else, I was sort of expecting someone to say that the
developers were heavily influenced by other languages but felt there were
certain things that needed to be fixed. So, they did. I might not even be
in the ballpark on that thought. But, I was thinking that if I was, someone
could explain to me what.

This is not meant to be arrogant or slt. What you feel, is important,
because any language has an inner logic; and this logic should be your
friend.

I tried C++, had a small Java-Project and felt that these langs do not fit
to my mind. Then i tried Perl and guess what...., Then I thougth Python
would be the best choice, but after a while i became disappointed whit it.

I'm not going to just drink the Python kool-aid. I picked up a book on it
awhile back and have been trying to read up on it between semesters. I
haven't really done anything with it, though. After taking a semester of
Smalltalk, I started seeing that Python was bending in ways to be OO. So, I
can see where you are coming from with this comment.

unfortunately my employer wants me to use bash, perl and php.
So, there is now way of using ruby in big projects. Therewith other members
of this list will be more helpfull.
But for all the tiny things, that'd waste hours and hours, I use ruby and
get them done in a few minutes (logfile analysis, code analysis, database
manipulation).

Darren

 

[Ralf Müller]

Hi Darren,

Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2004 05:00 schrieb darren:

Am Dienstag, 28. Dezember 2004 09:02 schrieb Darren Crotchett:

[ . . . snip . . . ]

You're mixing different things:
1. for Smalltalk, you mentioned stagnation of the community: a fact, true
or false (or at least you're not satisfied)
2. for python, the popularity is good, but you get a bit annoyed, typing
strange commands: your feeling, and i know that, too.
3. for ruby: you're feeling, that it's quite near to smalltalk, so why
not smalltalk: Well:

Most of the replies seemed to focus on the very last question (about the
community's growth). Now, I wish I hadn't asked that. I don't think it's
a bad thing to be heavily influenced by a Smalltalk. I just figured that
the developers had some annoyances with several languages (including ST)
and felt they could do a better job. I was trying to figure out A) if that
was the case. B) how they improved it.

I have only programmed in Cincom's Smalltalk. I know there are other
versions (like GNU/Smalltalk and Squeak). One of the problems that I ran
into was that I couldn't always tell if I was programming in "Smalltalk" or
"Cincom Smalltalk". I didn't care for that. I didn't want to get hooked
on a proprietary way of doing things. So, I always wanted to know "is this
Smalltalk?" or "is this Cincom?". If I wanted proprietary, I would
probably be using C#.

That's why I avoid using an IDE: to many things in the background I don't know
about. I'm want to be able to work even under the worst circumstances: Just
an editor, the interpreter, no X.
And i love the feeling to have everything under my 10 fingers.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

In your first message, you mixed the popularity of a language with your very
own disappointment with it. I could not figure out, what precisely the
problem was. But afterall you posted that message, and this shows, how big
your dissatisfaction is. It seemed to me, that the lack of popularity is not
your first problem according to smalltalk.

But: Maybe I'm guessing to much ...

finaly: if Smaltalk feels 'natural' ot you, ruby will be your friend

best regards
ralf

 

[Esteban Manchado Velázquez]

No idea what this "-tv" option is. I think I should ask the TIOBE
folks. IAC, the Tiobe index might seem strange and all, but don't you
think in most cases it seems to depict things correctly.

Perhaps it's just a way to try to filter out TV programming (as opposed to
computer programming). Just in case there is a TV program about snakes and
Python gets more points, or something like that ;-)

Regards,

 

[Premshree Pillai]

Perhaps it's just a way to try to filter out TV programming (as opposed to
computer programming). Just in case there is a TV program about snakes and
Python gets more points, or something like that ;-)

Yes, you're right. I racked my brain trying to figure out what that
"option" meant. #-o

 

[Nicholas Van Weerdenburg]

Versus Smalltalk, the impression I get is that Ruby is file-based with
convenience libraries for files, text, system administration, and web
development. That has a much bigger impact then it would seem. It's
sort-of why sed/awk/bash can still useful, even if you know Ruby or
Perl- they are even closer to the file and operating system items you
want to manipulate.

This leads to bottom-up value propositions. I can learn Ruby in a day,
and do really useful things for scripting and automation. I can then
incrementally extend my knowledge, and tackle bigger problems.

So, I don't think there is anything too explicit that Ruby "fixes"
versus Smalltalk. Rather, it's pragmatic file-based focus give a
different feel, and a different utility and learning path then
Smalltalk.

It's Perl regex, text-processing, and system scripting influence also
offers some comfort in using Ruby. Ruby's infix notation (it's been
referred to a Lisp with infix notation by some) also offers some
comfort for people from a C/Java-style language backgroup. Ruby feels
to me like C or Java with annoying extra syntax removed, so there is
an immediate "I know this" feeling- especially with a bit of Perl
background.

Considered another-way, Ruby is well positioned for adoption from a
path-dependence perspective- experience in Java and Perl, with the
mystique of SmallTalk attached to it, gave me an overwhelming urge to
learn Ruby.