From: ser@... (Sean Russell) Date: 2004-05-07T00:34:02+09:00 Subject: Re: [OT]Is Ruby Top 1 of Programming Languages that are Loved? ptkwt@aracnet.com (Phil Tomson) wrote in message news:... > Yeah, mine's quickly coming to an end... I must say I've been lucky, I Bummer. Too bad we all can't band together and start a Ruby Solutions company :-) > I think this has been brought up before by others, but I'd be willing to > work for less $ (don't spread this around too much :) to work on a Ruby > project than I would be willing to work for doing the Heck, yeah. What clients don't understand yet is that they'd be getting more for their money. Hm. Of all the things I said Ruby "needs", what would be the most useful is improved code validation tools, like a type checker. People tend to not trust scripting languages for large projects; personally, I blame Javascript and VB for giving all other scripting languages a bad name. > who would make that trade too. So maybe instead of offshoring, corporations > should figure out what languages people would code in for less$ if given > the opportunity (also, consider the productivity gain they would get by > using Ruby) ;-) Unfortunately, it is often a case of someone who thinks they know enough about architecture issues making the decision that the project needs to be done in one language or another. In a lot of cases, the decisision is actually based on good requirements. As much as I love Ruby, I wouldn't think of it first if I was trying to architect a GUI-heavy client. Additionally, Ruby isn't "well known", and obscurity can do a lot of damage to a language when it is being considered for a project. Where's the support if something goes wrong? Finally, there are the performance issues. Often, it is reasonable to choose a single language with decent performance rather than choose to use two languages, one for glue, and one for performance-critical code. > So, are we ruined by Ruby? ;-) I know *I'm* spoiled. > >must so many of us wear the Cruel Shoes of Java? Ruby needs a killer > >app, like an interpreter in Mozilla so that web designers can script > >with Ruby instead of Javascript. > > That would be very nice. Maybe it's a matter of 'converting' the right > people in the Mozilla project. Maybe. I mean, it wouldn't be widespread unless other browsers started supporting it (IE, in particular), but it would be nice. I think if somebody submitted a patch to Mozilla that enabled this support, it might be kindly received. Perhaps not. --- SER