[ruby-talk:00782] Re: plugging Ruby

On 31 Aug, Jonathan Aseltine wrote:
> I thought people might be interested in this. Here's how I am plugging
> Ruby on my rbison homepage (and in all subsequent Freshmeat
> announcements of rbison):
> 
> -------------
> 
> What is Ruby?
> 
> Ruby is a GPL'd object-oriented programming language that is

Sorry, but that is not totally true! You *can* put Ruby under the GPL,
but you have not to ought to! You could also take matz' style license as
contained in the README. :-))

That could be *very* important. GPL is too restrictive. matz' license is
much more free than the GPL. That is essential for using Ruby in
commercial apps. So I would propose to change that sentence.

> interpreted, powerful, elegant, and extensible. It features complete,
> built-in regular expression facilities (much like Perl's), a true

Hmm... I feel a little bit unsatisfied with that regexp thingy! Ruby has
no built-in regular expressions, but a built-in syntax for creating
instances of the class `Regexp'. That is unlike Perl and, IMHO, a big
advantage. Both the regexp syntax (e.g. `/.../' or `%r[...]') is
built-in as so is the class `Regexp', so we perhaps could say the
sentence like above. But then the advantage would not be clear, I feel.


> garbage collector (unlike Python), and a simple, intuitive syntax
> (unlike Perl or Python).

You like to be flamed, isn't it? ;-))) Although I find Ruby the best, I
would not said its syntax is more clear or intuitive than Python's one.

But we have not to discuss about Perl, of course :-))))

> In short, it is the best very high-level
> language (VHLL) available. 

Here I agree totally with you! :-)

> 
> 
> What do you think?

See my comments above pls. Furthermore I think you should mention
following things, if possible:

	- Ruby is not only OOL as e.g. Python is, but all in Ruby is an
	  object of a certain class. There is no artifical distinction
          concerning types and classes as in Python or Perl.

	- Every class can be extend during runtime (means after definition)!

	- It does not matter for Ruby if a class is coded in C or in Ruby itself.
	  A parent class can also be coded in C or Ruby. That is a strong feature
	  for people who wants to extend the ruby interpreter.

	- Ruby supports prototype based programming as well as the traditional
	  class/instance scheme.
	
	- The true garbage collector also breaks cycle references (unlike Python
	  or Perl). Furthermore it is *very* easy for extension programmer to
	  deal with Ruby's GC.

        - Ruby has true closures (unlike Python).

	- Block of code could be given to a subroutine for later execution.

	- Threads for the most platforms. They are independend from the OS native
	  thread mechanism. So even M$-DOS could have multithreading using Ruby. :-)

Okay! Enough advertisment. :-) These comments are not meant as critique,
but as improvement proposal, ok? :-)

May I also use your plugging description for my homepage (if I get one
sooner or later)? 

> 
> Jon
> 

\cle