From: hanzspam@... (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hannu_Kankaanp=E4=E4?=) Date: 2003-08-21T19:33:21+09:00 Subject: Re: Why did you switch from Python to Ruby? Sean O'Dell wrote in message news:... > That's precisely my point. People don't switch languages that often; > not all-out switches. When someone does, it's interesting to know why. But if people haven't left Ruby, what can we gain by examining this class of people, that consists of nobody? Nothing. So I fail to see the point. > I didn't offer a comprehensive method for evaluating Ruby, I made a > single suggestion to help a person in their evaluation of it. It's just > one way to gain perspective, take it or leave it. But I just explained earlier why it's a pretty useless way to gain perspective in this case. If people haven't left Ruby, how can we learn about it's flaws from these 0 people? So what kind of perspective can we gain, actually? In your previous post, you were tempted to jump to the conclusion that since people haven't left Ruby, it must be superior to competitors. At least that's how I interpreted it, e.g. from the statement "I have trouble imagining even one person leaving Ruby because it wasn't a good enough script language for them" among others. It just isn't so. I also read a Ruby tutorial shortly after learning Python (no emotional bonds yet), but I disliked what I saw so I decided to go with Python. Suppose that at first everyone is a Perl programmer. Now they hear about Ruby and read a couple of tutorials. Then those who like Ruby, will change to it and those who don't, will stick to Perl. Now 30% [1] of Perl programmers have left Perl, and 0% of Ruby programmers have left Ruby (why would they go back to the language they left?). Can we conclude that Ruby is superior because 0% has left it, or can we conclude that Ruby is worse because only 30% changed to it (not over 50%)? [1] Stats completely made up, probably exaggerated