From: Rich Kilmer Date: 2002-09-07T06:13:01+09:00 Subject: RE: Larry Wall's comments on Ruby I would like a quick shot at this. I was not as much supprised as impressed with Ruby. I was doing HEAVY Java development (300k line framework) and the dynamic/pure oo nature of Ruby was VERY different than Java. I read the Pickaxe book in two days...did not touch the language until a week later. The book just kept me thinking...internalizing the differences in dynamic vs. static behaviors objects and classes. Then I started using it and was functional very quickly...rewriting some of my java utilities in a fraction of the amount of code/time it took in Java. I moved on to more complex things...then I hit what I will call the "refactoring loop". Ruby lets me code, refactor, code, refactor...its really awesome (unit tests performing refactoring validation). I NEVER wanted to refactor my Java code (its just not fun). With Ruby the language does not supprise me (in its syntax/architecture), but the code I write very much does. Matz...thanks for a great language Andy...thanks for a great book -Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Hunt [mailto:andy@toolshed.com] > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 4:41 PM > To: ruby-talk ML > Subject: Re: Larry Wall's comments on Ruby > > > >yeah and as I said, depending on your background , > Ruby is just as full > >of surprises as C++ is. > > Disagree; the Ruby FAQ is quite a bit skinnier than 4" :-) > > >My guess is Ruby won't surpise you too much only if > you have Perl/Python > >background. That's it. > > I've never written a line of code in Python, BTW. > > But you've piqued my curiosity: tell me, what did you find > surprising about Ruby? Where "surprising" is defined as > "you thought it worked one way" and then discovered that it > did not, or that it worked that way some of the time and some > other way the rest of the time? > > Just learning a new concept doesn't count as surprising, > but being led astray by inconsistent behavior does. > > /\ndy > >