From: Jim Menard Date: 2001-08-12T10:44:04+09:00 Subject: [ruby-talk:19563] Re: /.ed again Al Chou writes: > --- Joel Wilsson wrote: > > Interesting (and pleasing) to see that the comments > > this time aren't all "we don't need Ruby, we already > > have Python", but instead "wow, looks cool". > > And this despite the fact that that developerWorks article is just about the > poorest representation of Ruby I have seen. I'm not saying it's _bad_ in an > absolute sense, but reading it reminded me of every other quick language > tutorial I've ever read. It demonstrates essentially nothing about > Ruby-specific things that set the language apart from others; if I hadn't read > anything about Ruby prior to it, I would have shrugged and thought, "yet > another programming language ". I rated the article and submitted comments. I suggest everyone else do so as well. Jim -- Jim Menard, jimm@io.com, http://www.io.com/~jimm/ "We get a million calls a month saying, 'Hey, this product is confusing.'" -- Bill Gates on the volume and tone of Microsoft's customer feedback.