From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2006-09-12T16:27:23+09:00
Subject: Re: The economics of a slow but productive Ruby

On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 01:33:20PM +0900, Gregory Brown wrote:
> On 9/11/06, Marc Heiler <shevegen@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> >The same what can be said about Ruby here can also be said about
> >Python, even if Python would be a tiny bit faster. However I feel
> >that Python - with all its quirks - is "more advanced" in terms of
> >being used or accepted in companies.
> 
> can we avoid Python vs. Ruby in this argument... please?
> 
> I don't think that arguments about this are helpful.  A fine
> pythonista will do better in python than in ruby, and likely, vice
> versa.

I don't see how Python is even relevant, except in saying "If so-and-so
works for Python, it should work for Ruby too, as they fill very similar
niches in the programming ecosystem," or something like that.  They
differ, for purposes of this discussion, mainly in terms of popularity,
and that difference varies depending on the specific sub-niche you're
addressing.  So . . . what exactly was the point of bringing it up in a
discussion of the economies of Rails vs. .NET in the enterprise (or
whatever)?

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Ben Franklin: "As we enjoy great Advantages from the Inventions of
others we should be glad of an Opportunity to serve others by any
Invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously."