Hello!
I am only interesting of Ruby. I need to know: why did you choose this
prog. language. Which benefits gives it for you in comparison with
another languages? If you leave any language or maybe prog.
environment and went to Ruby - again why?
Thank you all.
Nicolay Vasiliev.
The only language that didn’t cause headache when studying OOP
PS: there’s Russian ML on Ruby, see
http://altlinux.ru/mailman/listinfo/ruby/
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 01:22:27AM +0900, Nicolay Vasiliev wrote:
I am only interesting of Ruby. I need to know: why did you
choose this prog. language.
–
---- WBR, Michael Shigorin mike@altlinux.ru
------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/
Hi,
These are my experiences. I hope that this answers your question:
I come from a Perl background. I liked Perl because it was a very
flexible and expressive language. However, there were two problems with
Perl that made me lookf or an alternative:
I looked at Python many times. I tried to like Python, but ultimatelly
I found it very restrictive. Once I grew used to how easy it is to do
stuff with Perl, I just couldn’t adapt to a restrictive language.
When I found Ruby, I quickly fell in love with it. This is why:
After I learned Ruby, I found other things that made me want to stay
with the language:
Ruby is incredibly well-designed. For example: I was a Perl hacker
for years, whereas I’ve only used Ruby for a few months. Today I
understand the Ruby internals much better than I ever understood Perl’s
(and I tried harder with Perl).
Related to the above: Ruby is much easier to extend than Perl. I’ve
written C extensions for both Perl and Ruby. There is imply no
comparison.
Ruby adds a great deal of powerful features that would never have
occurred to me as a Perl hacker (for instance, iterators and code
blocks).
In summary. Ruby is: clear, easy to use, easy to understand, flexible and
very powerful.
The only drawback that I see:
It's not as fast as Perl.
In 99% of cases, I save more time by writing a program in Ruby than
I would gain by executing it in Perl.
For the other 1%, I might write a C extensions and then it’ll be
faster than Perl.
Best.
Daniel.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 01:22:27AM +0900, Nicolay Vasiliev wrote:
Hello!
I am only interesting of Ruby. I need to know: why did you choose this
prog. language. Which benefits gives it for you in comparison with
another languages? If you leave any language or maybe prog.
environment and went to Ruby - again why?Thank you all.
Nicolay Vasiliev.
–
Daniel Carrera
Graduate Teaching Assistant. Math Dept.
University of Maryland. (301) 405-5137
For me it was the easy way to understand OOP i didnt in C++ or Java. I dont
know why but in Ruby it was totally easy to understand and with this i
already understand C++ 
The second reason i choosed Ruby was that i
searched for something different to php i learned before and i was fascinated
how powerful Ruby is and that it is runnig on nearly any platform …
What should i say ? It was love on first sight.
mfg. Jonas
Am Donnerstag, 30. Januar 2003 17:22 schrieb Nicolay Vasiliev:
Hello!
I am only interesting of Ruby. I need to know: why did you choose this
prog. language. Which benefits gives it for you in comparison with
another languages? If you leave any language or maybe prog.
environment and went to Ruby - again why?Thank you all.
Nicolay Vasiliev.
I read an interview in the local paper with either Dave or Andy - can’t
remember which - and he said “Here’s how you write a loop in Ruby”
3.times { do stuff }
and I said to myself, “I gotta get me some of that.”
After 20 years of programming in a variety of procedural languages I
wanted to learn a new language and I wanted that language to be OO. Ruby
fit the bill. Very easy to learn and very easy to try things out.
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:03:35 +0000, Nicolay Vasiliev wrote:
Hello!
I am only interesting of Ruby. I need to know: why did you choose this
prog. language. Which benefits gives it for you in comparison with
another languages? If you leave any language or maybe prog. environment
and went to Ruby - again why?Thank you all.
Nicolay Vasiliev.
I’m a learning addict, so after I got the basics of C, C++, Perl5
(including it’s style of OO), I figured I’d look at something else. I
found Ruby through Google Directory. Looked at some examples, tried
porting some old little Perl scripts to Ruby, and loved it. Ended up on
the mailing list and IRC channel and saw all these helpful people, and
that is a great bonus. My list of “languages to learn” has stalled at
Ruby, and I’m not sure when it will ever start again.
I was writing some code last night just to experiment with some numbers,
and I realized that I rarely had to think “now how do i do this…”, and
i’ve only been using Ruby for a month or so. Ruby stays out of your way
and lets you work. And even though a good amount of libraries exist,
it’s so easy to make your own stuff it you can’t (or don’t want to) find
a existing solution.
Also, being a very Pure OO language is wonderful. No explicitly passing
self like in Perl or Python, no wrapping basic types with classes like
in Java. Not to mention the syntax is very clean and pragmatic.
Some other benefits:
-Justin White
just6979@yahoo.com
http://tin.2y.net/
AIM: just6979
On Thursday, January 30, 2003, at 11:22 , Nicolay Vasiliev wrote:
Hello!
I am only interesting of Ruby. I need to know: why did you choose this
prog. language. Which benefits gives it for you in comparison with
another languages? If you leave any language or maybe prog.
environment and went to Ruby - again why?
so true! i just chuckle when i sit in on our c++ design meetings now
-a
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Michael Shigorin wrote:
The only language that didn’t cause headache when studying OOP
–
====================================
Ara Howard
NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory
Information and Technology Services
Data Systems Group
R/FST 325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80305-3328
Email: ahoward@fsl.noaa.gov
Phone: 303-497-7238
Fax: 303-497-7259
====================================
I never truly understood object orientation until I saw it in
Ruby. Then it seemed so natural!
Yeah, that’s it!
The only drawback that I see: It’s not as fast as Perl.
That’s it too though.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 02:51:34AM +0900, Daniel Carrera wrote:
–
---- WBR, Michael Shigorin mike@altlinux.ru
------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/
Hello!
Thank you all, guys, for your answers. I hope your laudatory words 
for
Ruby will be helpfull for me.
And now I have another questions.
For Python experienced people. How you compare Ruby with Python?
Is it possible to make in Ruby fully functional:
2.1 GUI-apps
2.2 DB-apps
2.3 Web-apps.
TIA,
Nicolay V.
Out of curiosity, how so? Some of ruby’s goodness is so much more useful that
C++'s, but I don’t find a lot of it to be OOP related; iterators, typeless
variables, closures, and the like. The “OOPness” of ruby and C++ I find
relatively equivalent.
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Michael Shigorin wrote:
The only language that didn’t cause headache when studying OOP
so true! i just chuckle when i sit in on our c++ design meetings now
Nicolay Vasiliev wrote:
And now I have another questions.
- Is it possible to make in Ruby fully functional:
2.1 GUI-apps
Check one of the GUI-Toolkits in the RAA.
I like FxRuby most, but then there are other toolkits wich also have
their benefits.
If memory serves right, there’s even a text based GUI toolkit.
2.2 DB-apps 2.3 Web-apps.
Again check the RAA (or wait for other answers).
HTH
Stephan
- For Python experienced people. How you compare Ruby with Python?
Python feels very hackish to me, compared to Ruby, because you have to
pass self to every object method, private variables aren’t really
private, and many of the core libraries are written in a procedural
style, which makes OO code feel very wierd to write.
I also love the block syntax of ruby.
- Is it possible to make in Ruby fully functional:
2.3 Web-apps.
See:
http://segment7.net/ruby-code/webplayer/webplayer.html
also on the RAA:
http://raa.ruby-lang.org/list.rhtml?name=webplayer
Nicolay Vasiliev (N.Vasiliev@apatit.com) wrote:
–
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
All messages signed with fingerprint:
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
Hello!
Thank you all, guys, for your answers. I hope your laudatory words
Ruby will be helpfull for me.And now I have another questions.
- For Python experienced people. How you compare Ruby with Python?
I like Ruby’s object orientation better. Python is not 100% OO, but more
of a hybrid. For instance, there are both functions and methods, and they
are different. In Ruby, there are only methods.
However, you can define a method that is just a method of the class Object
(at the top of Ruby’s hierarchy). Those can be used just like a function,
and you can call them functions.
- Is it possible to make in Ruby fully functional:
2.1 GUI-apps
2.2 DB-apps
2.3 Web-apps.
Short answers: yes, yes, yes.
2.1 GUI-apps:
Ruby/Tk
Ruby-GNOME2: ruby-gnome2.sourceforge.net
FXRuby (Fox): fxruby.sourceforge.net/
RubyCocoa: http://www.imasy.or.jp/~hisa/mac/rubycocoa/index.en.html
Ruby/FLTK: ruby-fltk.sourceforge.net
My favorite is Ruby-Gnome.
2.2, 2.3 – See PickAxe: www.rubycentral.com/book/
Cheers,
Sat, 1 Feb 2003 01:42:21 +0900, Daniel Carrera dcarrera@math.umd.edu pisze:
I like Ruby’s object orientation better. Python is not 100% OO,
but more of a hybrid. For instance, there are both functions and
methods, and they are different. In Ruby, there are only methods.
Well, also procs and blocks…
However, you can define a method that is just a method of the class
Object (at the top of Ruby’s hierarchy). Those can be used just
like a function, and you can call them functions.
Except they all land in a single namespace. Python functions sit in
their modules.
–
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
__/ qrczak@knm.org.pl
^^ Blog człowieka poczciwego.
try implementing these two
ruby :
class Table < Array
…
end
c–:
class Table : public std::vector <std::vector std::string > >
{
}
in general, just try extending (extensibility being major measure of OOness
IMHO) the stl.
try implementing the state pattern in c–
try implementing the observer pattern in c–
try implementing th visitor pattern in c–
these are some things which should be readily implementable in any OO
language, if you are a GoF fan. ‘readily’ takes on an entirely geological
meaning if you are referring to c–
-a
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Mike Campbell wrote:
Out of curiosity, how so? Some of ruby’s goodness is so much more useful
that C++'s, but I don’t find a lot of it to be OOP related; iterators,
typeless variables, closures, and the like. The “OOPness” of ruby and C++ I
find relatively equivalent.
–
====================================
Ara Howard
NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory
Information and Technology Services
Data Systems Group
R/FST 325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80305-3328
Email: ahoward@fsl.noaa.gov
Phone: 303-497-7238
Fax: 303-497-7259
====================================
Don’t know. Seems “natural” though. No self-enforcement over
stupid thing, kind of that?
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 02:48:22AM +0900, Mike Campbell wrote:
The only language that didn’t cause headache when studying OOP
Out of curiosity, how so?
–
/me almost forgets unsolved mod_ruby + ruby-dbi / 1.7 since that
got done and working in PHP+MySQL…
“Stephan Kämper” Stephan.Kaemper@Schleswig-Holstein.de ???/??? ?
??? ???: news:b1dnct$1247v7$1@ID-96582.news.dfncis.de…
Nicolay Vasiliev wrote:
And now I have another questions.
- Is it possible to make in Ruby fully functional:
2.1 GUI-appsCheck one of the GUI-Toolkits in the RAA.
I like FxRuby most, but then there are other toolkits wich also have
their benefits.
If memory serves right, there’s even a text based GUI toolkit.2.2 DB-apps 2.3 Web-apps.Again check the RAA (or wait for other answers).
HTH
Stephan