Hi,
just saw these figures:
Question is whether they are comparing apples and oranges...
Cheers
robert
Or rubies and perls.
Peter
···
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 09:12:17PM +0900, Robert Klemme wrote:
Question is whether they are comparing apples and oranges...
cpan.org shows 21,674 distributions, while rubygems.org shows 19,428 gems. I'm not sure what they're scraping.
I did an article on this a few years back. It's interesting to look back and see how it compares now.
Also, this:
Regards,
Dan
···
On 1/7/11 5:12 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:
Hi,
just saw these figures:
Question is whether they are comparing apples and oranges...
Maybe the good old RAA, too. I have no idea if the site controls for
multiple identical listings, or how the variants of Gems / modules are
counted (QT-Ruby exists for at least Qt 3 and Qt 4, would those count
as one gem or two gems? What about wxRuby? Rails? Etc.)
The metric itself is debatable, anyway. Different capabilities of the
standard libraries lead to different gems/modules, and several
gems/modules solve the same problem in different ways. Not to mention
if a module/gem is still actively maintained or not (and how would you
measure *that*?).
···
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/7/11 5:12 AM, Robert Klemme wrote:
Hi,
just saw these figures:
Question is whether they are comparing apples and oranges...
cpan.org shows 21,674 distributions, while rubygems.org shows 19,428 gems.
I'm not sure what they're scraping.
--
Phillip Gawlowski
Though the folk I have met,
(Ah, how soon!) they forget
When I've moved on to some other place,
There may be one or two,
When I've played and passed through,
Who'll remember my song or my face.
They count registered modules which is not a meaningful CPAN metric.
Registering a module is something optional, it requires application
etc. That's a fraction of CPAN.
Since "module" is a Perl term (think .pm), to refer to a "library"
CPAN uses the term "distribution", that's what you can compare
numbers with. There are more distributions than gems as of this
writing.
···
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:
cpan.org shows 21,674 distributions, while rubygems.org shows 19,428 gems.
I'm not sure what they're scraping.
You want quality over quantity. 
···
--
Regards,
Casey
Only, do not assume more quantity implies less quality 
In fact, CPAN's standards regarding test suites and documentation are,
generally speaking, still not matched in my opinion. Not to mention
CPAN Testers etc.
Gems are getting better and better, but in my view there's still walk to walk.
···
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Casey Hawthorne <caseyhHAMMER_TIME@istar.ca> wrote:
You want quality over quantity.