Ruby general question


(Greg Brondo) #1

Ok. I’m sold on Ruby (it really is great). I have a question though: Why
do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem to be written
in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the other scripting languages
(insert favorite here). I’ve written in Java and it seems more of a bear to
me than anything else. Ruby is much, much quicker for “getting the job
done”.

Thanks!

Greg Brondo


(Dossy) #2

Because that’s all they teach in school these days, and most
people don’t know much more than what they’ve been taught.

– Dossy

···

On 2004.01.03, Greg Brondo greg@brondo.com wrote:

Ok. I’m sold on Ruby (it really is great). I have a question though: Why
do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem to be written
in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the other scripting languages
(insert favorite here).


Dossy Shiobara mail: dossy@panoptic.com
Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/
“He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly – then you can let go and quickly move on.” (p. 70)


(Laurent Julliard) #3

you should ask this even in a java newsgroup/mailing list :wink:
BTW… well… I suppose… marketing?

···

il Fri, 2 Jan 2004 19:16:58 -0600, “Greg Brondo” greg@brondo.com ha scritto::

Ok. I’m sold on Ruby (it really is great). I have a question though: Why
do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem to be written
in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the other scripting languages
(insert favorite here). I’ve written in Java and it seems more of a bear to
me than anything else. Ruby is much, much quicker for “getting the job
done”.


(Anders Bengtsson) #4

Greg Brondo wrote:

Ok. I’m sold on Ruby (it really is great). I have a question though: Why
do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem to be written
in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the other scripting languages
(insert favorite here). I’ve written in Java and it seems more of a bear to
me than anything else. Ruby is much, much quicker for “getting the job
done”.

I think it’s because of the lack of an obvious choice for a GUI toolkit.
Combined maybe with the problems, real or imagined, of making a easily
installed and easily launched application in Ruby.

/Anders


(Josef 'Jupp' SCHUGT) #5

Hi!

  • Greg Brondo:

Why do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem
to be written in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the
other scripting languages (insert favorite here). I’ve written in
Java and it seems more of a bear to me than anything else. Ruby is
much, much quicker for “getting the job done”.

Why do people use Java (the programming language)?

  • Some do it because of the prejudice that if it is from a
    well-known company it must be good.

  • Some do it because of the prejudice that Java programs are
    automatically cross-platform (one can easily write Java programs
    that are not portable)

  • Some do it because it is the best language for the problem at
    hand.

  • Some do it because the client asked them to do it.

Many more reasons are possible. One of Ruby’s major problems is the
lack of presence in the media.

It’s a positive feedback loop: The more people know what Ruby can do
for them the more people will learn about it and use it.

Ruby needs evangelization and evangelization takes time. When people
from the local LUG seek for a skript solving some problem I quite
often send a script - written in Ruby - even though the LUG is
irreversibly contaminated by camel dung :->

Josef ‘Jupp’ SCHUGT

···


http://oss.erdfunkstelle.de/ruby/ - German comp.lang.ruby-FAQ
http://rubyforge.org/users/jupp/ - Ruby projects at Rubyforge
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Germany 2004: To boldy spy where no GESTAPO / STASI has spied before.


(Ferenc Engard) #6

Greg Brondo wrote:

Ok. I’m sold on Ruby (it really is great). I have a question though: Why
do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem to be written
in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the other scripting languages
(insert favorite here). I’ve written in Java and it seems more of a bear to
me than anything else. Ruby is much, much quicker for “getting the job
done”.

I think it’s because of the lack of an obvious choice for a GUI toolkit.
Combined maybe with the problems, real or imagined, of making a easily
installed and easily launched application in Ruby.

/Anders

Both are agreed.

Here I write my opinions, based on a few months ruby programming (the
code now reached the 5000 lines), and c++ compiled language background.

At the same time while I love the scripting languages’ freedom, I miss
the (sometimes quite sophisticated) compile-time error checkings of the
compiled languages. At least a syntax checker, warnings for coding style
(e.g. undefined (nil-initialized) object variables, possible not
existing locals, etc.)? There are mistyped variables in my code written
a few days ago, just because it didn’t run yet.

I miss a usable debugger. I.e. what I can use in a event-driven GUI
program, and do not slow down the program with 2 magnitudes.

Another problem is the documentation. While ruby stands quite good in
this field, many libraries are not (e.g., dbi), and I cannot keep with
the changes (for example, I tried to search where it is written that I
can break out from iterators with break, and didn’t find it easily).
OTOH, if I report a bug here, two (OK, one :slight_smile: days later it is fixed,
and it is good, and do not care about whether is it documented or not.
:slight_smile:

Maybe the lack of an IDE is a problem, although I do not prefer them
even in c++ (I do not program in java). Anyway, a stable, usable class
browser would be good…

Maybe I just didn’t found the way, but it is hard to express the public
interface of my classes/modules, as there is no separate class
declaration. Also, I couldn’t get into rd; I feel it clumsy and a bit
featureless. IMHO instead of figuring out and coding a new code
documentation system, we should have been use an existing (e.g.
Doxygen), and write only the parser for ruby language.

Most of these arguments are not an issue for small programs. I never
will understand why people write a few hundreds (thousands) lines of
C-Delphi-C++ code to make some data conversion, string processing etc.
instead of writing 10-20 lines of ruby (OK, tcl, perl, python, or even
awk or bash) code. OTOH, it is possible that I just didn’t get into
coding big programs in scripting languages.

Ferenc


(Tom Copeland) #7

One indicator of Ruby’s usage are the download charts of the Ruby
interpreter on RubyForge:

http://rubyforge.org/project/stats/index.php?report=months&group_id=30

Seems like a fair number of folks are getting Ruby… and that’s only
one of several mirrors…

Yours,

tom

···

On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 18:31, Josef ‘Jupp’ SCHUGT wrote:

Hi!

  • Greg Brondo:

Why do more large applications (like LimeWire for instance) seem
to be written in Java these days instead of Ruby or one of the
other scripting languages (insert favorite here). I’ve written in
Java and it seems more of a bear to me than anything else. Ruby is
much, much quicker for “getting the job done”.

It’s a positive feedback loop: The more people know what Ruby can do
for them the more people will learn about it and use it.


(Ron Coutts) #8

Ferenc Engard wrote:
I miss a usable debugger. I.e. what I can use in a
event-driven GUI program, and do not slow down the program
with 2 magnitudes.

Maybe the lack of an IDE is a problem, although I do not
prefer them even in c++ (I do not program in java).

Regarding an IDE and debugger, try out the Eclipse IDE (www.eclipse.org)
with the Ruby-Eclipse plug in. It’s a great IDE with good Ruby
debugging.

Ron


(Laza) #9

Ferenc,

Thanks for posting your troubles in Ruby - you speak my mind!

In addition, I have been trying to find a decent GUI toolkit. Fox looks
nice, but nobody has heard of it outside of Ruby it seems. I used GTK, and
the Ruby implementation does not work well, and it is a bear to install
Glade. My little app
(http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~laza/Software/multimedia_html_links/)
crashes from time to time, which tells me that Ruby-GNOME2 is not ready
for business.

···


-Laza
http://lazax.com/blog

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:53:48 +0900, Ferenc Engard ferenc@engard.hu wrote:

Both are agreed.

Here I write my opinions, based on a few months ruby programming (the
code now reached the 5000 lines), and c++ compiled language background.