Bruce Eckel and Ruby

ruby-talk
1

<sigh>

I really don't understand the point of this. If you like Python, use it.
If you like Ruby, use it. I am in the latter category.

In fact, I am not opposed to learning both. At the moment I haven't time,
but later maybe I will. It's a language, not a religion.

His use of "hyperenthusiast" is interesting. Does it apply only to non-Python
people?

As for the "Ruby has better OO" argument -- Pythonists call it FUD, but it
appears simple common sense (from what Python I've seen). But I think a
large part of that is that Ruby and Python are evolutionarily different.
I've heard -- this may be wrong -- that Python's OO descends from Modula-3
or some such. I can't comment. I do know that it seems less OO than Ruby
to me (or Java, C++, Object Pascal).

As for significant whitespace -- surely it's a matter of opinion whether
this is the "right" way or not. One can make arguments in both directions.
I was initially drawn to the idea, but after playing with it, I found it
had its drawbacks.

Most (human) languages are written left to right. Are Arabic and Hebrew
"wrong" because they aren't?

Give it a rest, people.

Hal

2

<sigh>

I really don't understand the point of this. If you like Python, use it.
If you like Ruby, use it. I am in the latter category.

In fact, I am not opposed to learning both. At the moment I haven't time,
but later maybe I will. It's a language, not a religion.

I agree with you completely.

His use of "hyperenthusiast" is interesting. Does it apply only to non-Python
people?

I think the problem he has (like many other Pythonistas, Javans,
Perlists, etc.) is that Ruby is getting a lot of exposure now thanks
to Rails, and he feels his livelihood might be threatened by what he
perceives as simply a fad. I think he is calling all the people who
tend to jump from fad to fad in the computing world as
hyperenthusiasts, and he may have a point. I don't think he meant that
all Ruby or Rails people were these flaky hyperenthusiasts.

Maybe he is right and Rails is just a fad, but based on how people are
reacting to it, I'm not so sure. Surely all the Railists are not just
under the spell of DHH's skilled marketing, eh? After all the best
marketing is word of mouth.

Ryan

···

On 12/20/05, Hal Fulton <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> wrote:

3

Hal Fulton wrote:

<sigh>

<muchGoodStuffElided/>

Give it a rest, people.

Amen.

Besides, we should be ranting about how Ruby is better than Lisp.

:slight_smile:

James

···

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
Ruby Code & Style - Ruby Code & Style: Writers wanted
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
http://www.30secondrule.com - Building Better Tools

4

-austin

···

On 20/12/05, Hal Fulton <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> wrote:

<sigh>

I really don't understand the point of this. If you like Python, use it.
If you like Ruby, use it. I am in the latter category.

--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca

5

Hal Fulton wrote:

Most (human) languages are written left to right. Are Arabic and
Hebrew "wrong" because they aren't?

Yes?

        nikolai (who wants to debate the merits of top-to-bottom writing
                 as well)

···

--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/\!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}

6

An interesting article. I didn't read it as being con ruby. Just
reiterating what we all know about not understanding a problem until
you've implemented the solution at least once before.

7

In fact, I am not opposed to learning both. At the moment
I haven't time, but later maybe I will. It's a language, not
a religion.

I'm tried both as well. In fact, I was directed to ruby by
a poster on c.l.py...

His use of "hyperenthusiast" is interesting. Does it apply
only to non-Python people?

He probably means "fanboy", but was put off by Python's "one and
only one reasonable way" of doing things. :slight_smile:

As for the "Ruby has better OO" argument -- Pythonists call it
FUD, but it appears simple common sense (from what Python I've
seen). But I think a large part of that is that Ruby and
Python are evolutionarily different. I've heard -- this may
be wrong -- that Python's OO descends from Modula-3 or some
such. I can't comment. I do know that it seems less OO than
Ruby to me (or Java, C++, Object Pascal).

I'm tempted to join in the "Python OO is weak" chant. But your
last point, that they are simply different approaches, is valid,
and I shall refrain... for now.

As for significant whitespace -- surely it's a matter of
opinion whether this is the "right" way or not. One can make
arguments in both directions. I was initially drawn to the
idea, but after playing with it, I found it had its drawbacks.

There are two things that I think python got absolutely *right*:
One is Python's ternary expressions ("if 0 < x < 10:"), which
have functional equivalents in Ruby. The other is significant
whitespace.

I think this has to do with the fact that Python, being derived
from an educational language, imposes educational practices on
its code; it's also quite possible that if modern educational
languages focused more on actually teaching good practices and
style, and less on making sure they use the latest GUI toolkit
endorsed by Microsoft/Sun, I wouldn't have such a strong opinion
on the matter.

Most (human) languages are written left to right. Are Arabic
and Hebrew "wrong" because they aren't?

    puts "#$your_way sucks" unless
        $your_way.equal?( $my_way ) # :slight_smile:

That said,

I've been a Ruby hobbyist for about 4 or 5 years now, and I had
no idea what "Rails" was until recently. I knew that traffic in
c.l.r had more than tripled in recent months, and that instead
of the normal Ruby idiom/syntax/language questions, I started
seeing a lot of configuration questions about some application
framework apparently based on ruby.

I'm glad ruby is getting the attention I believe it deserves.
And I've seen some exciting things happen in the core language.
But Rails is a framework. Ruby is a language. Many dozens of
developers churn out Rails applications without ever really
knowing much more than tutorial-level Ruby. And as a web
development framework, it can't escape being a fad. Some fads
fade into obscurity (ASP, HTML::Mason, or *gasp* Zope), and some
fade into oblivion (ColdFusion). Even PHP's seeming Golden Age
will eventually pass, and either pass its torch, or burn out.

I've played with Rails, and find it fascinating. And hopefully
it will grow and evolve and influence technology, and we will
learn and benefit, but it will fade. I only hope Ruby doesn't
invest all of itself in this trend and fade with it.

You could all spend another 20-30 post thread psychoanalyzing my
article and extrapolating information about how I was abused by
Zope as a child, or we could get back to what brought us here
originally, which is having fun with a great language and the
great tools it brings with it.

</rant>

My USD$0.05,
Tim Hammerquist

···

Hal Fulton <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> wrote:

8

i usually get slammed for pointing out the following (my hatemail, and
spam always go way up)

in my opinion it seems like python people just aren't happy with: "if
you like python, use python. if you like ruby, use ruby." or "add BOTH
python and ruby in your toolbox"

i think the above is sage advice, but in my year in python land: you
used python exclusively (because it was the best). no need to use any
other language. they weren't interested comparisons. if <blank>
language had a feature that python didn't then that feature was
"useless", "implemented wrong", or "this is the way we do that in
python, it's the best way to do it."

i think the best way to compare the two languages is to learn them. i
used python for about a year, and i've used ruby now, for 2 years or so.

i came from a perl background so ruby was relatively easy to pick up.
but i also like and use tcl/tk on a regular basis. i don't use python
anymore because there is ruby

the choice for me was easy because it was so clear.

as an aside, my all time favorite feature in ruby is the threading i
don't care if it's native or not. i tend to overuse threads, if a
program can be sped up at all with threads, i use them.

···

Hal Fulton wrote on 12/20/2005 3:33 PM:

<sigh>

I really don't understand the point of this. If you like Python, use it.
If you like Ruby, use it. I am in the latter category.

--
http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1
telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org

9

i'll say. when one space too many or too few can mean time spent
hunting it down to make a program work i think it's a serious design
flaw in a language.

near the end of my python experience i found my self using console
based editors so i could see the spacing a lot easier.

···

Hal Fulton wrote on 12/20/2005 3:33 PM:

As for significant whitespace -- surely it's a matter of opinion whether
this is the "right" way or not. One can make arguments in both directions.
I was initially drawn to the idea, but after playing with it, I found it
had its drawbacks.

--
http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1
telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org

10

James Britt wrote:

Besides, we should be ranting about how Ruby is better than Lisp.

:slight_smile:

Ruby kicks Cobol's ass!

Jamey

Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email and any materials contained in any attachments is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, or are not the intended recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender by email and destroy all copies of the original message, including attachments.

11

I think that if you think Bruce Eckel is threatened by Ruby then you
need to read about Bruce Eckel. He is only asking "why".

Robert

12

Ryan Leavengood wrote:

I think the problem he has (like many other Pythonistas, Javans,
Perlists, etc.) is that Ruby is getting a lot of exposure now thanks
to Rails, and he feels his livelihood might be threatened by what he
perceives as simply a fad.

You nailed it, Ryan. This has little (if anything) to do with which-language-is-better, and everything to do with earning a living. Mr. Eckel makes a good living teaching Java and writing about Java and consulting about Java and the adoption of anything other than Java hurts his income.

There are a few of us hobbyists that can afford to play dueling languages 'cause it's fun and what-the-hell, we've got time, but the guys out there traveling and lecturing and writing and teaching and consulting have to put food on the table. Bruce Eckel thinks his best chance is Java. Bruce Tate thinks there are greener pastures elsewhere. I wish 'em both the best of luck.

Just a thought: a programming language that is free, easy to learn, rewards mastery, and has flocks of eager devotees who want to share their knowledge for free offers little incentive to a guy who needs to earn a living writing and lecturing and teaching and consulting.

13

Nikolai Weibull ha scritto:

Hal Fulton wrote:

Most (human) languages are written left to right. Are Arabic and
Hebrew "wrong" because they aren't?

Yes?

        nikolai (who wants to debate the merits of top-to-bottom writing
                 as well)

actually, I still think bustrofedic, or whatever it is spelled in english, still is the best writing system ever. Start top left then go right, one line down then go left and so on

14

Glad ya think so. I find it obnoxious, and it contributes to an
appearance to the source that makes my eyes bleed. It detracts from
visual symmetry and makes everything look unfinished to me.

That's just me, though -- just like your impression that it's "right" is
just you.

···

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 06:17:48PM +0900, Tim Hammerquist wrote:

There are two things that I think python got absolutely *right*:
One is Python's ternary expressions ("if 0 < x < 10:"), which
have functional equivalents in Ruby. The other is significant
whitespace.

--
Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

unix virus: If you're using a unixlike OS, please forward
this to 20 others and erase your system partition.

15

That's why I use tabs and only tabs for indentation, in any
language. You can set Vim or enscript to make a tabstop ever 3
columns, but there's no way to mistakenly put too few or too many.

I think spaces are OK also, but when people start mixing tabs and
spaces, I just gotta scream.

SteveT

Steve Litt

slitt@troubleshooters.com

···

On Thursday 22 December 2005 09:03 am, tony summerfelt wrote:

Hal Fulton wrote on 12/20/2005 3:33 PM:
> As for significant whitespace -- surely it's a matter of
> opinion whether this is the "right" way or not. One can make
> arguments in both directions. I was initially drawn to the
> idea, but after playing with it, I found it had its drawbacks.

i'll say. when one space too many or too few can mean time spent
hunting it down to make a program work i think it's a serious
design flaw in a language.

16

If you want to drive people away from Ruby, go with that.

Stephen

···

In message <slrndqi7a5.ebp.penryu@haruko.saiyix>, Tim Hammerquist <penryu@saiyix.ath.cx> writes

have functional equivalents in Ruby. The other is significant
whitespace.

--
Stephen Kellett
Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/software.html
Computer Consultancy, Software Development
Windows C++, Java, Assembler, Performance Analysis, Troubleshooting

17

Jamey Cribbs wrote:

James Britt wrote:

Besides, we should be ranting about how Ruby is better than Lisp.

:slight_smile:

Ruby kicks Cobol's ass!

But Ruby won't be truly complete until you can do something like this:

···

----------------------------------
require 'inline'

class Inline::Bf < Inline::BrainF_ck # [1]
  def initialize(mod)
    super(mod)
  end

  def import(header)
    @src << "#import #{header}"
  end
end

class MyClass
  inline(:Bf) do |builder|

    builder.bf %q{
>+++++++++[<++++++++>-]<.>+++++++[<++++>-]<+.+++++++..+++.[-]>++++++++[<++++>-]
<.#>+++++++++++[<+++++>-]<.>++++++++[<+++>-]<.+++.------.--------.[-]>++++++++[
<++++>-]<+.[-]++++++++++.
    }
  end
end

MyClass.new.test
--------------------------------

[1] The Brainfuck Programming Language

Although I'd bet I'm not the first to think of this :slight_smile:

--
Alan Garrison
Cronosys, LLC <http://www.cronosys.com>
Phone: 216-221-4600 ext 308

18

I doubt there are very many professional programmers relying on a single language to put food on the table. I don't think Bruce is an exception here. He writes books about C++ in addition to Java, for example.

I read the article and it sounded to me like it favored both Python and C# over Java.

James Edward Gray II

···

On Dec 20, 2005, at 4:12 PM, Timothy Hunter wrote:

This has little (if anything) to do with which-language-is-better, and everything to do with earning a living. Mr. Eckel makes a good living teaching Java and writing about Java and consulting about Java and the adoption of anything other than Java hurts his income.

19

Timothy Hunter wrote:

Mr. Eckel makes a good living teaching Java and writing about Java and
consulting about Java and the adoption of anything other than Java hurts
his income.

Mr. Eckel has written books and articles on C++, Java and Python. In
fact, from what I can tell, he rather prefers Python over Java. So I
don't think his livelyhood is in any danger if Java suddenly becomes
unpopular.

···

--
-- Jim Weirich

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.

20

No, he's not, actually. I don't think he's threatened, but he's
actively throwing stones about a language that he doesn't understand
and apparently doesn't want to understand.

Which is fine (that he doesn't want to understand, at least), but he
should stop pretending that he's just asking "why".

-austin

···

On 20/12/05, Robert Hicks <sigzero@gmail.com> wrote:

I think that if you think Bruce Eckel is threatened by Ruby then you
need to read about Bruce Eckel. He is only asking "why".

--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca