From: Premshree Pillai <premshree.pillai@...>
Date: 2005-01-11T04:36:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Python vs Ruby

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:24:27 +0900, Michael DeHaan
<michael.dehaan@gmail.com> wrote:
> A few things to think about for those that worry about popularity.
> 
> (1)   One learns a language because one learns something from learning
> a language, not because the language is immediately the
> end-all-beat-all.   I still want to play with O'Caml and Haskell, and
> I doubt I'll ever use them "for work".

This is true for some folks; I wonder that's the case for a majority:
a lot of folks learn languages not necessarily because they are going
to use it; unfortunately, though, that lot, I suspect, is much lesser
than the other lot.

I use a lot of Ruby for my own projects, but _cannot_ use it for work.
Why? Because my colleagues don't know about it.

> 
> (2) If we must chose what is widely adopted, we would always use Java
> for every project -- or we might be stuck on Cobol.   This is not the
> case, as one can always choose the right tool for the job.   That tool
> is probably not Ruby in 1/2 the cases out there, but that doesn't
> lessen Ruby's value.   To mix metaphors, some people are always
> looking for hammers in their toolbox, or sometimes swiss army knives.
>  Sometimes you need a torque wrench.   It depends.   Knowing "more"
> can never hurt.
> 
> (3) However it is very clear that languages can grow in popularity
> from the bottom up.   Use a little Ruby on a special homebrew project,
> use it on some build machines at work, and pretty soon you've

The whole point about educating people about Ruby is that people know
the _existence_ of the language. People can then make an informed
choice. Ideally, every programmer in the world should be made aware of
Ruby; and that probably is what evangelizers should set as their goal.

> converted 1 or more new people to Ruby.   Nothing wrong with that.
> Ruby adoption levels do not prevent you from using it.
> 
> (4) Ruby popularity isn't as small as one might think.  I have the
> Python list and the Ruby list side-by-side in GMail right now, and the
> Ruby list is 80% as active as the Python list.  Not bad!

Same here. But generally I've observed around 60% activity as the Python list.

> 
> I really don't think Python-fans are wrong in the least.  It's a
> decent language, and some of the decisions such as playing down lambda
> and the blocks type approach means solutions are developed differently
> -- but that doesn't make them wrong.    I like list comprehensions,
> for instance.
> 
> If you can grok the "C" and kernel development mindsets, a lot of this
> makes sense.   Simplicity and obviousness mean a lack of cleverness at
> face value, but they are very practical, straight forward, and easy to
> understand for the most part.   Those goals aren't all bad.
> Personally, I'm looking for convergence, not distance between the
> languages.
> 
> 


-- 
Premshree Pillai
http://www.livejournal.com/~premshree