From: John Joyce <dangerwillrobinsondanger@...>
Date: 2007-10-02T06:08:38+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby vs. PHP

> .  PHP is a
> templating language.
PHP actually is a full-fledged programming language.

I think one of the reasons it took off so well is that its syntax is  
very C-like so many computer science grads feel right at home with it  
after being taught C/C++/Java for so long. It takes less of a leap  
for them to start using it than would Perl or Ruby.

The worst thing to me about PHP is its object implementation and  
overuse of sigils.

Regarding the sigils and syntax, Ruby shows that if you have an  
identifier that is not already used in some other capacity, then it  
is enough to say it is a variable or object or a function that takes  
no arguments. A function is generally obviously a function, if it  
takes no arguments then it doesn't need parentheses !  If it is  
method it will be appended to an object's identifier. This is the  
core of Ruby's gracefulness. Why should we have to type more than we  
need to?

That said, there is something to be said for explicitness in  
programming. If it's necessary and appropriate it is good.
PHP as a language is pretty explicit most of the time, but to the  
point of being arguably less legible. But many programmers are overly  
accustomed to bending over backwards for code that is less legible (C/ 
C++ in many cases) or abusively explicit (Java) to the point of  
redundancy.

But in the end, none of this matters, it is up to you to try a  
language and see if you like it, see if it works for what you need.  
You're not likely going to write an OS in Ruby, but you could write a  
DSL that might make that easier to do. You're also not likely going  
to do server side scripting in COBOL, but you probably could do it  
somehow if you really wanted to, and you'd be able to connect to some  
legacy systems older than you.