[ruby-talk:5349] Re: Is Ruby "enough better"?

This seems a question comparing the virtue of OOP and
procedural programming. As we all know OOP did not really
deliver what it once promised. The argument on this is on
going. Whether you like OOP or procedural programming, it
has to depend on the job on hand and your preference.

Ruby is supposed to the "most OOP"ed language dosen't make
it better as a language. The usability and functionality are
what everyday programmers concern. In this regard Ruby has a
long to go. If taking Java as an example, it is designed
without clear purpose and concequently does not really fit
any application well, but a lot programmers use it since the
large collection of API and libs. Taking C/C++ as an
example, a lot people use them even though one has to deal
with memery managments.

It may not be wise to start a flamewar on which on good and
which better. Ruby certainly has the best implementation of
OOP. It is no doubt the best choice as a OOP language. Ruby
community may have more to gain if every one keeps an open
mind since Python, PHP, Perl, Java, and etc all have their
unique features which can benefit Ruby greatly if
incorprated.

If we all try to make Ruby as e-commerce langague ie with
support of RPC, messageing (like J2EE JMS), XML support
(SAX, DOM), EJB like features, we may have something much
better than J2EE with the cleanest implementation of J2EE
features.

I use Java, Python, PHP, Perl, Ruby, Javascript, C/C++,
Tcl/Tk etc. for our work.


Philip


Gabriel Lima wrote:
> 
> Hi.
> First of all, please don't flame me, or misinterpret my question.  I am
> quite sure that you people
> receive questions regarding Ruby in comparison to other languages all
> the time, but that is not what
> I am after.