[#5218] Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

13 messages 2000/10/02

[#5404] Object.foo, setters and so on — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>

OK, here is what I think I know.

14 messages 2000/10/11

[#5425] Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

18 messages 2000/10/11
[#5427] RE: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — OZAWA -Crouton- Sakuro <crouton@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:49:46 +0900,

[#5429] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...> 2000/10/11

Thanks for the input.

[#5432] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,

[#5516] Re: Some newbye question — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "D" == Davide Marchignoli <marchign@di.unipi.it> writes:

80 messages 2000/10/13
[#5531] Re: Some newbye question — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2000/10/14

Hi,

[#5544] Re: Some newbye question — Davide Marchignoli <marchign@...> 2000/10/15

On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#5576] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2000/10/16

matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:

[#5617] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2000/10/16

Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> wrote:

[#5705] Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>

There has been discussion on this list/group from time to time about

16 messages 2000/10/20
[#5712] Re: Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@...> 2000/10/20

Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:

[#5882] [RFC] Towards a new synchronisation primitive — hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>

Hello fellow rubyists,

21 messages 2000/10/26

[ruby-talk:5344] Re: Ruby vs PHP ?

From: "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@...>
Date: 2000-10-09 18:02:07 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5344
Hi matju,

At Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:23:28 +0900,
Mathieu Bouchard <matju@cam.org> wrote:
> > First of all, PHP is characterized as an embedded language in HTML
> > documents.  Its grammar is likely to be a mixture of Perl and
> > JavaScript, with some Java's OO flavor.
> 
> I must say PHP3 is the first "OO-supporting" language I've ever seen
> lacking support for SmallTalk's "super" (or Self's "resend"). Also, it
> seems that all extension module functions were thrown into the main
> package, and no OO allowed; so you had [1] to pollute the main package,
> and you had [2] to write yourself a wrapper. 
> 
> Thus, PHP3's OO is very unlike Perl's, Python's, Java's, and Ruby's, etc.
> Note that I didn't take a look at PHP4. 

I was talking about PHP4, which has more developed OO support.

You can see Perl, JavaScript and Java flavors from the following piece
of PHP4 code:

	class Bar extends Foo {
	  var $foo;
	
	  function method1($arg1, $arg2) {
	    $this->$foo[$arg1] = $arg2;
	  }
	}

> >  Ruby can be used for general purposes, as well as some
> > specialized purposes.
> 
> Well, I thought general-purpose is for many purposes, while
> special-purpose is for small sets of purposes. In this sense, PHP is a
> language that started blatantly too-special purpose and which is growing
> towards general-purpose. Someday it will be found that there is no such
> thing as a "web programming language".

Likely to be.  However, there'll still be a big difference between "a
xyz-purpose language with OO features" and "an OO language with xyz
feature".

-- 
                           /
                          /__  __       
                         / )  )  ) )  /
Akinori -Aki- MUSHA aka / (_ /  ( (__(  @ idaemons.org / FreeBSD.org

"We're only at home when we're on the run, on the wing, on the fly"

In This Thread