From: Gregory Seidman <gsslist+ruby@...>
Date: 2007-09-25T22:52:56+09:00
Subject: Re: I love Ruby but what is the deal with... this !

On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 10:35:06PM +0900, Ruby Maniac wrote:
> I love Ruby but what is the deal with the lack of a VM ?
> I love Ruby but what is the deal with the lack of performance ?
> Why does FreeBASIC run faster than my lovely Ruby code ?

Ruby is a language written to scratch someone's (Matz) itch. It happens to
be quite nice as a language, but its development isn't driven by corporate
concerns or corporate money.

> Why do I have to ship source code with my Ruby app ?

You don't. Check out rubyscript2exe, among other things.

> Does this mean I have no choice but to develop Open Source Code
> forever using Ruby ?
> How will I ever be able to make any money coding Ruby when I have to
> ship source code to all my customers ?

Absolutely not. Just because you ship source code doesn't mean that the
code is not protected by copyright laws. Indeed, if not for copyright
protection there would be no such thing as open source licenses, since they
depend upon copyright law protecting the source code. If you wish to
develop an application and make it available under a license that allows
only single use on a single processor machine with less than 1GB of RAM and
only on alternate Tuesdays, you are free to do so and the license (should
anyone enter into such a licensing agreement with you) is enforceable.

> Why have all other languages that attempted to be commercial successes
> failed because programmers had to ship source code with their apps for
> those languages ? (*Check the history of Smalltalk*)

Smalltalk may or may not have attempted to be a commercial success. As of
now, Ruby is *not* attempting to become a commercial success, except
insofar as Microsoft is supporting/pushing IronRuby (which does have a VM
since it involves a Ruby to CLR bytecode compiler).

> Where the heck is Ruby 1.9.0 for crying out-loud, I mean it's going on
> 2 years and still no stable Ruby 1.9.0 for me to play with at work !

As far as I know, Ruby development is following a versioning scheme similar
to what Linux development used to follow. That is, odd-numbered point
releases are unstable. When it is stable it will be called 2.0 (last I
heard, anyway).

> I want to use Ruby for absolutely everything !
> I want Ruby to be the only computer language anyone can legally use in
> the USA !
> I want to run for congress to get a law passed to make Ruby the
> national programming language.
> I want all other Moneky Coders like me to have to use the lovely Ruby
> code I love to write !

If you really mean any of that, you are a fool. Ruby is a single language,
a single tool. It is the right tool for many jobs, but not for all jobs.
Don't limit yourself. If you are unhappy with the state of Ruby right now,
take a break from it and learn some other languages (my suggestions:
Lisp/Scheme, Erlang, Haskell, OCAML, C, C++, C#, PostScript, MIPS assembly,
SPARC assembly, x86 assembly, and not necessarily in that order) to broaden
the set of tools in your toolbox.

> Ruby Rocks !  (*Pass me another Red Bull so I can get back to work
> writing more Ruby code !*)

Ruby is the most pleasant language I've ever used. It also has its warts.
Have a little perspective.

--Greg