[#1263] Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

33 messages 2000/02/08

[#1376] Re: Scripting versus programming — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>

Conrad writes:

13 messages 2000/02/15

[#1508] Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...>

17 messages 2000/02/19
[#1544] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/02/23

Hello Ian,

[#1550] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...> 2000/02/23

On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 02:56:10AM -0500, Yasushi Shoji wrote:

[#1516] Ruby: PLEASE use comp.lang.misc for all Ruby programming/technical questions/discussions!!!! — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>

((FYI: This was sent to the Ruby mail list.))

10 messages 2000/02/19

[#1569] Re: Ruby: constructors, new and initialise — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article

12 messages 2000/02/25

[ruby-talk:01367] Scripting versus programming

From: "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Date: 2000-02-15 05:26:32 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1367
For those of us who (to varying degrees) regard Ruby as in the same league
as Scheme and Smalltalk, except better (indeed better enough to bother
learning), calling Ruby a scripting language is somewhat-to-very misleading
(in effect, not in intent), despite whatever the strict definition of
scripting is. How many of you hear Scheme and Smalltalk described as
scripting languages? How many of you would normally describe them that way?

I recommend that we (and Ruby documentation) describe Ruby first and
foremost as "one of the world's most powerful programming languages", and
subsequently mention that is also enormously useful for scripting--if, when,
and where appropriate. This may (or probably should) sound trite to
technically astute people, many business/IT decisions at tens of thousands
of shops world-wide are unfortunately made on the basis of superficial
impressions.


YARC && TGIR,
Conrad


(Yet Another Ruby Convert(from Perl))
(Thank Goodness its Ruby)


In This Thread

Prev Next