From: Mohammad Khan Date: 2005-01-11T06:37:51+09:00 Subject: Re: Python vs Ruby On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 14:24, Michael DeHaan 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". Play with them as long as you want ! I can bet you will use them in work, once you will find they are better than your current one. Or, someday you will find yourself that you are not playing with them anymore because its worthless. -- MOhammad > > (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 > 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! > > 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.