From: Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
Date: 2000-12-10T07:58:54+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:6993] Re: Ruby in the US

Terrence Brannon <brannon@lnc.usc.edu> writes:

> Is it possible for the US to develop corporate acceptance for another
> language. I find Ruby to be 5-20% better than Perl based on what
> aspect of the languages we are talking about, but both languages
> are high-performers, almost like comparing the Yankees and the Mets or
> something. 

I'd say that for large-scale applications the gap is wider. I've
written large Perl programs and large Ruby programs, and I know which
I prefer looking at now. It is, however, a personal issue.

> Thus, I don't see corporate America as looking for something to fill
> Perl's gap. 

Developers and their organizations all over the world are looking for
the same thing: a way to produce applications that is simple,
reliable, repeatable, and enjoyable. Different folks have differing
ideas on ways of doing this.

For many developers, Ruby resonates with the way they think. Unlike
many other languages, Ruby allows them to express themselves more
directly, and more concisely. Shortening the distance from thought to
code is a key component in achieving a rapid, accurate development
flow.

However, this is truly a personal thing. Some people think most
clearly using Smalltalk, or Lisp, or Java, or C++. If they've given
Ruby an honest try, and found that it doesn't help them, that I
personally appreciate their effort and wish them well.

I don't think the Ruby community is out to conquer corporate
America. I'd guess we're here because Ruby satisfies each of our
personal needs for a better language. We're welcoming new developers
all the time. But it remains and individual thing.


Regards


Dave