FAQ update (was Re: Thoughts on Ruby)

ruby-talk
1

Crap. I forked myself.

Sorry for starting a new thread on this, but the original post was forked
from a non-related thread, the subject of which I keep forgeting. Below,
Massimiliano is calling for a solution to a recurring problem that I have
been a large part of. I apologize for my excesses and give my agreement to
what he proposes. I would personally prefer that there be only one place to
look for answers to the problems discussed below. So I vote for an extended
FAQ, that includes William’s ``List of things that newcomer to Ruby should
know’’ and sections that summarize threads such as this:
Why and How is Ruby different from <my last/favorite language>
I believe that the FAQ is the appropriate place for such things because it
serves this function on so many other lists. After all, the complaint is
that these are Frequently Asked Questions.

···

On Monday 04 November 2002 8:46 am, Massimiliano Mirra wrote:

Folks, what do you do when you see code like this?

c1 = 3 * 3 * Math::PI

c2 = 6 * 6 * Math::PI

c3 = 21 * 21 * Math::PI

You refactor, right?

def area(r)
  return r * r * Math::PI
end

c1 = area(3)
c2 = area(6)
c3 = area(21)

So we’ve got wisdom in programming. Can we please apply it
in life, too?

It’s simply too much to leave the list for a couple of days and find
half a hundred messages resurrecting topics (and beating them to death
again) such as:

- Alternatives in syntax or `There is more than one way to write
  it'
- Overloading '='
- Declaring variables
- Compiling Ruby to bytecode or whatever

First it was because Ruby is different than Pythong, then because it
is different than C++, now because it is different than Smalltalk,
tomorrow because it is different than God knows what.

Can we (or at least those who still have energy to answer, and yes I’m
cowardly leaving myself out) refactor this recurring `human code’ into
a wiki or whatever, and redirect people there? We don’t want
ruby-talk to become ruby-design-advocacy, right? And we don’t want
matz to waste his time justifying design decisions (which thankfully
he does very seldom already)?

William’s List of things that newcomer to Ruby should know'' does a great job of satisfying the practical concerns (How does it work
like…?‘’). Something is needed for the philosophical/theoretical
side (``Why is it like…?‘’).

Does this make sense?

Massimiliano

–
“Every real thought on every real subject knocks the
wind out of somebody or other.”
-Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.