[#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:5351] Re: Is Ruby "enough better"?

From: Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...>
Date: 2000-10-09 19:36:01 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5351
At Tue, 10 Oct 2000 03:40:02 +0900,
Gabriel Lima <Gabriel.Lima@enea.se> wrote:

> There, I've said it. I am really curious about your answers, I've
> been reading a lot of Ruby articles, but I have really not grokked
> it's apparent "Holy Grail of programming"-ness.  I am sure that I am
> not the only one. Please enlighten me.  :-)

I guess it all depends on what you want to do with and what you need.

for me, Zope is not a killer app at all, 'cause i don't need and I
don't use it.

IMHO, the advantages you listed are basically true. (I already here
someone is saying "there will be english book soon!" :^) but it can
also be used as a question to you.

"Perl or C has much more killer apps and books, why don't you use it?"

what's your answer? your answer might be the same as one of the
answers to your question you get from Ruby users.

if you don't wanna learn YAL then don't.  but it'd be too late to say
'Ah.. I wish I learned it 10 years ago'.

If I have to choose one and only one reason that I use Ruby, that'd be

'Because programming with Ruby is fun'.

Peace :)
--
            yashi

In This Thread