[ruby-talk:9375] Re: 101 Misconceptions About Dynamic Languages

On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Christian wrote:

> Please describe to me the practical difference between an 'interpreted
> language' and C++ with hot-swappable DLL's (without resorting to lame
> excuses about compile times, given Mr Moore's hueristic).

There's no point arguing about what each language can do and how each
language implements its features. Languages are like meta-quines. It's
possible to write a C++ compiler in Ruby, and it's possible to write a
Ruby interpreter in C++. This is sufficient to demonstrate that any
powerful feature named in one language can be replicated in the other,
including speed.

Languages are like vehicles. I love my motorbike. I'm passionate about
them. I buy magazines and test ride all the new models that come out.
The bike is so far superior to a car in any number of ways. The latest
Ferrari is indistinguishable from a speck of fly shit in my rear view
mirrors. I can go faster, stop faster and turn faster.

Yet I still have a car for where a bike isn't suitable.

When I go somewhere, I make a choice to ride or drive. My choice is
based on the task I'm accomplishing. If I'm going to work, I'll take
the bike. If I'm carrying a new TV home, I'll take the car.

I'm biased. I'll take the bike when it would have been a bit easier
to take the car. I want that extra speed and power.

This all has a corresponding cost. To turn left, a Volvo driver lazily
explores his nasal cavity with his forefinger and erratically turns the
steering wheel to the left. For me to do the same requires me to shift
my weight to the left, wait for the bike to settle, counter-steer the
bike to the required angle of bank and balance myself on my left foot
while holding with my right leg.

This is a cost I'm prepared to pay on smaller rides. Given the task of
getting from Adelaide to Melbourne and back, a round trip of about 1700km,
I took the bike. My back was killing me, my bum was numb, and the mental
and physical fatigue of the journey culminated in a highside which smashed
my right leg up and stopped me from walking for a year.

I drove to Melbourne and back in my car a couple of weeks ago. I sat
back listening to Chris Isaak tapes, air conditioner going full blast,
and erratically wobbled the steering wheel around as required, like a
Volvo drive minus the spelunking. It was more boring, but it was easy.

> template <class Ty>
> void foo(const Ty& X)
>     { X.bar(); }
> 
> template <class Ty>
> void foo(Ty& X)
>     { X.bar(); }

Squeeze the front brakes hard, apply back brakes, clutch in, rev engine
to prevent stall, downshift 3 gears, match engine speed to gearbox, let
out clutch, settle, tip bike over while releasing brakes, apex, rev up,
change up gears while accelerating.

> class UnnecessaryScopeGivenNamespaces
>     def foo(X)
>         X.bar
>     end
> end

Brake for corner, go around, accelerate.

I'm even better on my feet. I can go around corners on on dirt, through
water, uphill, up and down stairs, and in tight spaces that a bike can't
fit into.

But while my walking self is niftily zapping around corners, my bike
riding self is exploring that outback country town, and my car driving
self is covering the vast distances beyond.

If I see you riding along while I'm driving interstate, I'll wish I was
on a bike too. But I'll also know the back pain you've got, the tired
eyes, the mental fatigue and the other aches and pains that you've come
to expect as part of travelling.

Try something different. It doesn't have to be that hard.

-- 
  [e-mail]