From: "Michael T. Richter" Date: 2008-06-23T11:50:10+09:00 Subject: Re: Where does ruby excel? --=-ZzTk0g987LW65+4nlIBF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-qv8cdgE6jWZq7FqJJVfb" --=-qv8cdgE6jWZq7FqJJVfb Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (Ob. Disclaimer: I use Ruby for most of my programming except where Erlang does the job better.) On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 02:36 +0900, Marc Heiler wrote: > > Ruby has the potential for much more, but there doesn't seem to=20 > > be a problem domain where it truly excels. > Any place perl is used, ruby beats it with ease. Except speed. > Personally I never understood people who claim to use the right tool for=20 > the right job is the proper thing - and using 20 different solutions to=20 > achieve this with archai unix solutions. Just like I never understood why automobile mechanics need a toolbox that's taller than them with literally hundreds of tools in it, some of them really super-specialized. Surely they can do all their work with a hammer, a screwdriver and a wrench, right? > > On the client side Javascript seems to be the big winner.=20 > Ruby as a language - including practical and from a language design=20 > point of view - beats Javascript every time. Personally I prefer JavaScript's prototype object system over Ruby's ... pretty damned odd hybrid system. Ruby's singleton classes, for example, look to me an awful lot like a kludge hacked on to give capabilities that come out of the box for prototype-based systems. > That Javascript is a web-browser language only is a huge disadvantage. That would indeed be a huge disadvantage were it true. But oddly enough, I have no fewer than three different ECMA-conforming JavaScript implementations sitting on my hard drive right now without a browser in sight when I use them. (And that would be another advantage JavaScript has over Ruby: an actual standard that defines the language and its semantics along with several different implementations that conform -- sometimes roughly -- to that standard. My dream is for Ruby to have fully-defined semantics enshrined in a standard somewhere someday -- ISO or ECMA or even something semi-proprietary: as long as it is actually defined by more than inscrutable C code.) > I have yet to see gtk widgets in Javascript. In ruby, piece of cake. http://www.akbkhome.com/blog.php/View/139/Hello_world_in_Gtk_Javascript.htm= l http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/BuildingGtk http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-sashxb/ http://swik.net/PHP/Planet+PHP/Gtkjs+-+extending+objects/9zvw I humbly submit that you haven't seen them because you've allowed prejudice to make you not look for them. It took me less than five minutes of googling and hitting links to find the above stuff. --=20 Michael T. Richter (GoogleTalk: ttmrichter@gmail.com) I can see computers everywhere - except in the productivity statistics! (Robert Solow) --=-qv8cdgE6jWZq7FqJJVfb Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (Ob. Disclaimer: I use Ruby for most of my programming except where Erlang = does the job better.)

On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 02:36 +0900, Marc Heiler wrote:

> Ruby has the potential for much more, but ther=
e doesn't seem to 
> be a problem domain where it truly excels.

Any place perl is used, ruby beats it with ease.

Except speed.

Personally I never understood people who claim to u=
se the right tool for 
the right job is the proper thing - and using 20 di=
fferent solutions to 
achieve this with archai unix solutions.

Just like I never understood why automobile mechanics need a toolbox that's= taller than them with literally hundreds of tools in it, some of them real= ly super-specialized. Surely they can do all their work with a hammer= , a screwdriver and a wrench, right?

> On the client side Javascript seems to be the =
big winner.

Ruby as a language - including practical and from a=
 language design 
point of view - beats Javascript every time.

Personally I prefer JavaScript's prototype object system over Ruby's ... pr= etty damned odd hybrid system. Ruby's singleton classes, for example,= look to me an awful lot like a kludge hacked on to give capabilities that = come out of the box for prototype-based systems.

That Javascript is a web-browser language only is a=
 huge disadvantage.

That would indeed be a huge disadvantage were it true. But odd= ly enough, I have no fewer than three different ECMA-conforming Java= Script implementations sitting on my hard drive right now without a browser= in sight when I use them. (And that would be another advantage JavaS= cript has over Ruby: an actual standard that defines the language and its s= emantics along with several different implementations that conform -- somet= imes roughly -- to that standard. My dream is for Ruby to have fully-= defined semantics enshrined in a standard somewhere someday -- ISO or ECMA = or even something semi-proprietary: as long as it is actually defined by more than inscrutable C code.)

I have yet to see gt= k widgets in Javascript. In ruby, piece of cake.

http://www.akbkhome.com/blog.php/View/139/Hello_world_in_Gtk_= Javascript.html
http://trac.webkit.org/= wiki/BuildingGtk
http:= //www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-sashxb/
h= ttp://swik.net/PHP/Planet+PHP/Gtkjs+-+extending+objects/9zvw

I humbly submit that you haven't seen them because you've allowed prejudice= to make you not look for them. It took me less than five minutes of = googling and hitting links to find the above stuff.

--
Michael T. Richter <ttmri= chter@gmail.com> (GoogleTalk: ttmrichter@gmail.com)
I can see computers everywhere - except in the productivity statistics! = (Robert Solow)

--=-qv8cdgE6jWZq7FqJJVfb-- --=-ZzTk0g987LW65+4nlIBF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBIXw/JLqyWkKVQ54QRAmBMAJ9QnA9jkMm6qBjLBLvM8paeoVuMlACdE1G4 E+p801fuxhVqHlnZvFqzaUI= =Vi6s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ZzTk0g987LW65+4nlIBF--