Why not Ruby?

X

Xah Lee

Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
for those interested.

* Why Not Ruby?
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html

plain text version follows:
--------------------------------------

Why Not Ruby?

Xah Lee, 2008-12-31

Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today.

The articles i read in detail are:

* Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)¨J. Gives general overview.

* Brief tutorial: "Ruby in Twenty Minutes"
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/

* Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10.
http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour

The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The
"Ruby in Twenty Minutes" is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete
intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't
teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it
because his opinions i respect.

Q: Will you learn Ruby?

No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful
than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study,
functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far
more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's
also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or
power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby.

Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant?

Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level
lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't
think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript,
Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal
spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it
based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than
Scheme, and probably same as Javascript.

I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword "end" to indicate
code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like
that.

Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience?

No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl,
Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge
of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time
(roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the
time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like
Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo-
jumbo with its Python 3 "brand new" future.) There is absolutely
nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp,
Scheme lisp.

Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then?

Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical
utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all
heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a
academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs
such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot
more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc.

Q: Do you condemn Ruby?

No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many
languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them,
are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See:
Proliferation of Computing Languages.
 
R

Roger

Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
for those interested.

Who are you?

In case no one tells you, you are a cocky, egotistical windbag with
opinions that border constructive but never gets there. Why would
anyone care what you think? Again, who are you? Xah Lee? And? I
didn't subscribe to read reviews on Ruby. And I'm pretty sure anyone
that bothers to subscribe to a group about programming has the
wherewithal to research a language themselves and come to their own
determiniation.

Also, this is a Python group and not Ruby. I knew I should have
avoided this post and read the one about Nike Shoes from China. At
least those bits of trolling spam don't try to mask themselves as
something worthwhile.
 
G

Giampaolo Rodola'

Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
for those interested.

* Why Not Ruby?
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html

plain text version follows:
--------------------------------------

Why Not Ruby?

Xah Lee, 2008-12-31

Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today.

The articles i read in detail are:

* Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)¨J. Gives general overview.

* Brief tutorial: "Ruby in Twenty Minutes"http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/

* Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10.http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour

The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The
"Ruby in Twenty Minutes" is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete
intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't
teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it
because his opinions i respect.

Q: Will you learn Ruby?

No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful
than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study,
functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far
more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's
also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or
power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby.

Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant?

Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level
lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't
think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript,
Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal
spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it
based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than
Scheme, and probably same as Javascript.

I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword "end" to indicate
code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like
that.

Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience?

No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl,
Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge
of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time
(roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the
time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like
Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo-
jumbo with its Python 3 "brand new" future.) There is absolutely
nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp,
Scheme lisp.

Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then?

Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical
utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all
heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a
academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs
such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot
more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc.

Q: Do you condemn Ruby?

No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many
languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them,
are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See:
Proliferation of Computing Languages.

This is not a Ruby group.
I recommend you to go waste your time there.


--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib
 
T

Tim Greer

Giampaolo said:
This is not a Ruby group.
I recommend you to go waste your time there.

That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple,
irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best
to just filter the guy's posts.
 
K

Kenneth Tilton

Xah said:
Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
for those interested.

* Why Not Ruby?
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html

plain text version follows:
--------------------------------------

Why Not Ruby?

Xah Lee, 2008-12-31

Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today.

The articles i read in detail are:

* Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)¨J. Gives general overview.

* Brief tutorial: "Ruby in Twenty Minutes"
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/

* Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10.
http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour

The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The
"Ruby in Twenty Minutes" is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete
intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't
teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it
because his opinions i respect.

Q: Will you learn Ruby?

No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful
than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study,
functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far
more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's
also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or
power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby.

Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant?

Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level
lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't
think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript,
Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal
spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it
based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than
Scheme, and probably same as Javascript.

I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword "end" to indicate
code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like
that.

Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience?

No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl,
Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge
of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time
(roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the
time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like
Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo-
jumbo with its Python 3 "brand new" future.) There is absolutely
nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp,
Scheme lisp.

Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then?

Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical
utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all
heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a
academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs
such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot
more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc.

Q: Do you condemn Ruby?

No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many
languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them,
are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See:
Proliferation of Computing Languages.

Kenny Tilton, 2008-12-31

Q: Why not Xah's review of Ruby?

A. Three hours? I've had belches that lasted longer than that. Of
course, a true master can tell a lot in just a few hours of coding with
a new language...

Q: Read?!

A: That's what he said.


hth,kzo
 
M

member thudfoo

2008/12/31 Giampaolo Rodola' said:
Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
[...]

--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib

Hey, Giampaolo:

I had gone to the trouble to filter out the posts from xah lee, but
you have quoted his entire message. If you would like to scold xah
lee, you can do so directly without reposting to this fine newsgroup.

Thank You Very Much.
 
S

sln

Kenny Tilton, 2008-12-31

Q: Why not Xah's review of Ruby?


A. Three hours? I've had belches that lasted longer than that. Of
course, a true master can tell a lot in just a few hours of coding with
a new language...


Q: Read?!

A: That's what he said.


hth,kzo

Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's
guts out in a second.

sln
 
R

r

Hey Lee,
I really like your overview of the official Python tut, it's spot on,
and your study of OOP was quite fascinating! I like people who are
honest and not afraid to go up against the status quo, although i will
admit you go a little further than i might at times :). But the world
needs an enema from time to time. "Revolution is my name!"

Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his
insights of languages and tech is fascinating. The man lives in a
world driven by common sense, and you know what they say --"Common
sense is the least most common thing"-- just look around at the
responses here.

I come from a different world than IT, and I thought initially the IT
world would be filled with intelligent, free thinking, and open minded
people... BOY was i wrong! I would not turn my back on these people
for a second, lest you catch a knife in it!

I find it laughable how people hate you so much, but would still take
the time to reply to your post, just so they can call you a troll. You
are not a troll Xah, but your posts do expose the true trolls and
their minions. Instead of engaging in any sort of intellectual
conversation, they spit 3 grade insults and try to discredit you.

There is nothing wrong with a person expressing their opinion on any
subject. Apparently some of you need to get laid and calm down a
little. Xah has just as much right as anyone here to post his
thoughts, even if they are off topic. Look, if you don't like what he
is saying, DON'T F'IN READ IT!

Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are
from my supposed "brothers" here at c.l.py. Just letting you know
there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world
that did not contain an Xah lee.

Keep up the good work my brother, you have much more to give!
Thanks
 
J

Jason Rumney

The man lives in a world driven by common sense

"Common" sense suggests that his views are shared among the general
populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never-
ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to
start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the
debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are
not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little
more carefully sometimes.
 
R

Randal L. Schwartz

r> Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
r> have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
r> ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
r> and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are
r> from my supposed "brothers" here at c.l.py. Just letting you know
r> there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world
r> that did not contain an Xah lee.

Since Usenet has neither "stars" nor "ratings", you are hallucinating.

Care to elaborate?
 
P

Peter Wyzl

Randal L. Schwartz said:
r> Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
r> have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
r> ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
r> and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are
r> from my supposed "brothers" here at c.l.py. Just letting you know
r> there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world
r> that did not contain an Xah lee.

Since Usenet has neither "stars" nor "ratings", you are hallucinating.

Care to elaborate?

Google groups' corrupting influence...

P
 
K

Kenneth Tilton

Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's
guts out in a second.

Sorry, my new President has banned drama so I will only be responding
pleasantly to civil comments. (This has been a non-responding response.)

Peace,k
 
S

Stanisław Halik

In comp.lang.lisp r said:
Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his
insights of languages and tech is fascinating. The man lives in a
world driven by common sense, and you know what they say --"Common
sense is the least most common thing"-- just look around at the
responses here.
Might hold true for some rants, but most of it's tl;dr drivel. For
instance, his critique of Lisp's homoiconicity is completely off-target.
I come from a different world than IT, and I thought initially the IT
world would be filled with intelligent, free thinking, and open minded
people... BOY was i wrong! I would not turn my back on these people
for a second, lest you catch a knife in it!
So-called "IT" is driven by capitalistic impulses. Dijkstra and his
followers get dismissed as ivory tower intellectuals.

FUT warning.
 
R

r

"Common" sense suggests that his views are shared among the general
populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never-
ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to
start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the
debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are
not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little
more carefully sometimes.

I think if you will consider society as a whole, you will see that
most people don't display much sense at all. "Joe Blow" only cares
about paris hilton, britney spears, or janet jackson wardrobe
malfunctions. The only thing they contribute to society is human
excrement. So --"Common sense is the least most common thing"-- really
means there exists no sense as a commonality.

This can apply to higher educated people too, even Guido. Go and read
Xahs take on the Python official tutorial, you will find your self
agreeing with everything that he says. Guido filled it with so much
fluff and off topic BS, causing the learning process to shut down. The
only kind of person that might find it enjoying would be a fellow
Computer Science Graduate. I did not know it at the time but this
contributed to my late understanding of classes and regexes. And being
such a fanboy of Python and carrying such a high respect for Guido
that is hard for me to say, BUT it is the TRUTH nonetheless. Guido has
no business writing tutorials anymore, WHY you ask. Because he is too
smart, and too much on the inside. He cannot relate to the n00b
pythoneer, he has crossed the Rubicon. Less fluff more simple examples
are the key to quick learning. My love for python has blinded me to
some of the atrocities that exist here. I have many more examples from
the Official-TUT than Xah covered.

Don't take my word, judge for yourself...
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/xlali_skami_cukta.html

here is Xah's take on OOP, very good reading for beginners and
Gurus...
http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/t2/oop.html

If all Xah did was come here and say "Hey, python sucks donkey
dicks!", i would pay him no mind. But he brings much intelligence, and
vigor to an otherwise boring, and sometimes mindless newsgroup. What i
like about him is his out-side-the-box thinking style. He does not
give in to this BS "Proper Society" wants to push onto us. He is a
real rebel, but WITH a cause! And the cause is to bring common sense
back to a world of fluff an BS jargonisms. I don't always agree with
his thoughts, but most the time he's spot on. Open your min c.l.py.
Lest it close forever.

eliminate the life decline...
its time to change...
can't stay the same...
Revolution is my name!
-Phil Anselmo-
 
J

Jürgen Exner

[Why not Ruby?]

Becasue it is off topic in CL.perl.M just as in any other NG he posted
to.
Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his

Oh my good, the idiot discovered alter egos.
There is nothing wrong with a person expressing their opinion on any
subject. Apparently some of you need to get laid and calm down a
little. Xah has just as much right as anyone here to post his
thoughts, even if they are off topic.

Exactly everyone's point. He has exactly the same right as anybody else
which is exactly that NOBODY has the "right" to post off topic posts.
Sometimes they may be tolerated, on rare, special occasions even be
welcome. But by and large they are as disturbing as playing 'Love me
tender' during a perfomance of the Walkuere. I don't want to hear Elvis,
I paid my money for Wagner! If I wanted to listen to Elvis, then I would
go to an Elvis concert.
Look, if you don't like what he
is saying, DON'T F'IN READ IT!

He has been plonked a loooooooong time ago. It's just he newcomers, who
still respond to him. And no his alter ego with the unpronouncable name
of rt8396.
Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are

There are neither profiles nor stars or ratings on Usenet. Keep you
made-up nonsense to yourself.

jue
 
R

r

Xah Lee,
I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword "end" to indicate
code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like
that.

You could not be more right Xah, the use of "end" in a language as
high level as Ruby is redundant, and idiotic. There are a few things
about Ruby i really like, but this "end" business is blasphemy. If
ruby did not use indentation, i would see the need for "end", or
braces, or whatever, but why use both indentation AND the "end" word?
Such stupidity. I guess Mats thought Ruby would look too much like
Python, ARE YOU KIDDING MATS?, you already took so much from Python
anyway, dropping the end statement won't change that. And heck, you
will gain many new users with out it's archaic redundancy!!!!

I must say at first i did not like the each method but it has grow on
me because of its space saving attributes. There are also some nice
shortcuts in Ruby that do not exist in Python. I am beginning to think
the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and
Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear
syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus. I would probably lean more
towards python scoping and classes than ruby, but python classes need
a little less redundancy also. Of course pythons list, dict, strings
in my opinion just can't be beat, and regex forget-a-about-it! Python
rules here. Even though Ruby has built in support, python's is much
more elegant. I really like pythons handling of modules and
module.class.method syntax.

Both languages have much to offer, i believe though Python has a
better base, it just needs some cleaning up, and shortcut syntax so
moderate/Gurus don't develop carpal tunnel too early :)
 
T

Tomasz Rola

Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's
guts out in a second.

sln

Too much champagne? A guy (XL) is sometimes off topic and I don't always
agree with his postings - if I find the subject somewhat worthy, I usually
skim through it, this is how I have found myself knee deep in this
strange exchange between XL's supporters and opponents. And his website is
big like a magazine and full of strange, sometimes not interesting or hard
to assess stuff (it needs time to read and time is hard to find nowadays).
But sometimes, what he writes is informative, too. A bit redundant but
still, I would give him a small "plus", rather than "zero" or "minus".

But I do not remember him being blunt or agressive.

Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
** **
** Tomasz Rola mailto:[email protected] **
 
P

Paul Rubin

r said:
I am beginning to think
the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and
Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear
syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus.

You might like Tim Sweeney's POPL talk:

http://www.st.cs.uni-saarland.de/edu/seminare/2005/advanced-fp/docs/sweeny.pdf
Of course pythons list, dict, strings in my opinion just can't be beat,

On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary
implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years
I'll get around to writing one.
 
F

Fuzzyman

On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary
implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map.  One of these years
I'll get around to writing one.

Care to save me the effort of looking it up and tell me what Data.Map
does that Python's dict doesn't?

I guess if it is functional then every mutation must copy and return a
new data structure? (Which will be much more efficient in Haskell than
in Python - Haskell can share most of the underlying data whereas
Python would have to create a new dict every time. At least it only
stores references.)

Michael Foord
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,792
Messages
2,569,639
Members
45,352
Latest member
SherriePet

Latest Threads

Top