Wired magazine being their usual acurate self


(Kent Dahl) #1

(Sorry if this has come up already, I’m not all up to date)

Well, maybe I’m being harsh, but I had a look in Wired july 2002, red
cover yelling “The Next Intel”.

'lo and behold on pages 60-61, a huge programming language graph.
Ruby has incoming arrows from Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python as well as from
Sather. So far so good, I think.
But along comes a notes box on page 61 and states that
Ruby is “A hardware description language”…

… and I thought that graph was a good sign at first :frowning:

···


([ Kent Dahl ]/)_ ~ [ http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~kentda/ ]/~
))_student
/(( _d L b_/ NTNU - graduate engineering - 4. year )
( __õ|õ// ) )Industrial economics and technological management(
_
/ö____/ (_engineering.discipline=Computer::Technology)


(Tobi Reif) #2

kentda@stud.ntnu.no wrote:

Well, maybe I’m being harsh, but I had a look in Wired july 2002, red
cover yelling “The Next Intel”.

'lo and behold on pages 60-61, a huge programming language graph.
Ruby has incoming arrows from Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python as well as from
Sather. So far so good, I think.
But along comes a notes box on page 61 and states that
Ruby is “A hardware description language”…

that’s true:
http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/work/geraint.jones/ruby/

… and I thought that graph was a good sign at first :frowning:

I received that issue days ago, and also missed Ruby. My conclusions:

  1. The graph is not good
  2. Wired mutates into a suit mag since a while
  3. It’s still something special to be a Rubyist :wink:

Tobi

···


http://www.pinkjuice.com/


(HAL 9000) #3

(Sorry if this has come up already, I’m not all up to date)

Well, maybe I’m being harsh, but I had a look in Wired july 2002, red
cover yelling “The Next Intel”.

'lo and behold on pages 60-61, a huge programming language graph.
Ruby has incoming arrows from Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python as well as from
Sather. So far so good, I think.
But along comes a notes box on page 61 and states that
Ruby is “A hardware description language”…

… and I thought that graph was a good sign at first :frowning:

A regrettable but not totally incomprehensible mistake.
Someone did his research on the web.

There was/is in fact an older Ruby that was a hardware
description language.

Hal Fulton

···

----- Original Message -----
From: kentda@stud.ntnu.no
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 4:18 PM
Subject: Wired magazine being their usual acurate self…


(James) #4

Subject: Wired magazine being their usual acurate self…

(Sorry if this has come up already, I’m not all up to date)

Well, maybe I’m being harsh, but I had a look in Wired july 2002, red
cover yelling “The Next Intel”.

'lo and behold on pages 60-61, a huge programming language graph.
Ruby has incoming arrows from Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python as
well as from
Sather. So far so good, I think.
But along comes a notes box on page 61 and states that
Ruby is “A hardware description language”…

But it is:

http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/work/geraint.jones/ruby/

Of course, there’s the Ruby language we know and love (and related to
Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python, etc.), and this other Ruby language thing.

I first ran into it while searching here:

http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cs

(a rather nice site.)

… and I thought that graph was a good sign at first :frowning:

Well, it would be if they kept their references straight.

James

···


([ Kent Dahl ]/)_ ~ [ http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~kentda/ ]_/~


(Ned Konz) #5

We discussed this earlier.

I think the problem is that Grady Booch, who did the graph, lives in a
C/C++/Java world. His experience and the practices of the customers
of Rational don’t necessarily include Ruby.

Nice guy, talented and all, but not too into dynamic languages.

···

On Friday 05 July 2002 02:18 pm, kentda@stud.ntnu.no wrote:

(Sorry if this has come up already, I’m not all up to date)

Well, maybe I’m being harsh, but I had a look in Wired july 2002,
red cover yelling “The Next Intel”.

'lo and behold on pages 60-61, a huge programming language graph.
Ruby has incoming arrows from Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python as well
as from Sather. So far so good, I think.
But along comes a notes box on page 61 and states that
Ruby is “A hardware description language”…

… and I thought that graph was a good sign at first :frowning:


Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE


(Kent Dahl) #6

Well, atleast I guess I should be thankful that there wasn’t a line from
Visual Basic (which was partially based on something also dubbed Ruby)

However, I’m starting to wonder whether journalists read what they write.
It really irks me that they manage to have a “linage continues”-line
from Sather 0.1 noted as an “Interactive object-oriented language”,
and not start scratching their heads on how that lineage can be passed
on by a hardware description language…

···

On Fri, 5 Jul 2002 james@rubyxml.com wrote:

Of course, there’s the Ruby language we know and love (and related to
Eiffel, Smalltalk-80, Python, etc.), and this other Ruby language thing.


([ Kent Dahl ]/)_ ~ [ http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~kentda/ ]_/~