From: Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Date: 2002-09-25T14:51:32+09:00
Subject: Re: call for commentary: review of Ruby for a magazine (long, sorry!)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Wilson" <web2ed@yahoo.com>


> What bugs me about Ruby, or what keeps me `searching' for the ideal
> contemporary language is that Ruby doesn't have a complier to either
> native code or even byte code like Python, Ocaml, Java, and Lisp.  If
> Ruby had a native compiler, and this is a tall order given the dynamic
> nature of Ruby, I don't think I would voluntarily use anything else.

Ruby will compile to bytecode in, oh ... 3 years? ;)  By that stage, hopefully,
Ruby, Perl and Python will have a useful degree of interoperability via Parrot.
Can't wait.

I think it is correct to have avoided bytecode so far.  That would probably
make the language harder to flex.  As it solidifies, it is correct to seek a
more stable target.

> Once you write your first Ruby program, you'll need a baby sitter for
> your wife.

Good quote!

> //ed

Gavin