From: James Schementi Date: 2006-06-06T16:51:15+09:00 Subject: Re: I love Ruby - But how bright is Ruby's Future? ReggW wrote: > Austin Ziegler wrote: >> On 6/6/06, ReggW wrote: >>> > >>> Just like most open-source zealots, when presented with the facts you >>> change your story. >> >> You *really* don't want to take that attitude with me. > > Why...are you going to beat me up? Very mature guys .... The point of a programming language is to solve a specific problem. Some languages are better suited for solving certain problems compared to others. For example, C is great for having total control of memory and ensuring that the code executed can perform at an optimal level, but there are definitely times such performance constraints don't exist ... and then managed programming languages are better options. This is to address the origional author's statement of not learning many programming languages; to leverage languages effectively you need to know them, or need to be able to pick them up quickly ... or at least certain types of languages. I suggest understanding unmanaged code (C, C++), managed code (Java, C#), and then the "dynamic" languages (Python, Ruby, etc). The differences between dynamic and managed languages are mainly that managed languages are compiled while dynamic languages are in some form interpreted. Also most dynamic languages are dynamically typed, compared to static typing (declaring a variable of a type that can not be changed). This provides flexability and most programmers find it easier to work with. In short, languages are a tool. If you've got a nail, you don't try to drill it in; you use a hammer. Using a language that is not suited for the problem is like trying to force that nail in with a drill. So I suggest using the knowledge people have given in this thread and decide whether Ruby is a tool you want to apply to the problems you are trying to solve. ~Jimmy -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.