[#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:01394] Re: Say Hi

From: mengx@...
Date: 2000-02-15 19:11:10 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1394
> I'm not sure I see the point of adding a new library function that is
> the same as an existing capability. If you look at the Ruby standard
> library, we already have a whole load of duplication (take the file
> tests for example), which can make it quite intimidating for the
> newcomer. Our current summary of the base library runs to over 150
> pages!
> 
> So, my vote would be to add things only if:
> 
> a. They make things significantly easier or more idiomatic
> b. They add genuine new functionality.


The current Array method name 'pop' seems quite confusing to me(a new comer)
since it is also often used to pop the front of a FIFO queue. and often
'unshift' will be my foreever complaints :-) 


> 
> One of Ruby's strengths is its simplicity.

IMHO, Python has that merit. Ruby's strength lies in its well thought
implementation and C API. Ruby == [Python++, Perl--, Perlitics] and
Ruby++ == Rubu.delete(Perlitics) 

Thanks

-Ted


In This Thread

Prev Next