From: Ville Vainio Date: 2004-04-02T02:19:33+09:00 Subject: Re: deciding between ruby and python >>>>> "Seth" == Seth Kurtzberg writes: Seth> I don't think I would say that python has a lisp slant. In Seth> fact, ruby has more functional programming syntax (e.g. list Seth> processing) than python. Python is a procedural language. It's amazing to see how clueless people here can be, and still offer their opinions on the differences b/w the languages. Python has first class functions, Ruby doesn't. And yet ruby "has more functional programming syntax"? And it has, take this, "list processing"? Seth> OO was hacked onto Python. It isn't terrible, but it isn't Seth> really OO either. Wow. I'm speechless. Ruby is not more OO than Python - actually, I tend to think Ruby's OO is crippled by not having functions as first class objects. It's funny, I've chatted with various ruby people on IRC (on unrelated newsgrops), and they like to say that feature-this-or-that in Python is a hack. When questioned further, it appears that the feature is exactly equivalent to the Ruby counterpart. The Ruby guy just never learned it, because he blindly believed something he heard from another Ruby guy. I apologize if this entered the realm of ad hominem. Such outrageous statements, esp. when pronounced with such vigour, just can't go uncontested. I just innocently stumbled here looking for some juicy April Fool's pranks, and here's what I see... I would like to suggest people take a look at a quite independent comparison page at: http://userlinux.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?RubyPython Instead of the ancient page, comparing ancient version of ruby with an ancient version of Python that Ruby people like to refer people to. -- Ville Vainio http://tinyurl.com/2prnb