Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 10:50:52 PM UTC-6, rh wrote: Choices are good. [...] Having one choice is a mess. And look back at history and current events Sometimes choices are forced upon you without your consent or even without regard for the end users' well-being. In this case choices are no longer choices, they become unnecessary dead weight on the backs of users, they become malevolent multiplicities. Take cell phones for example. Nobody would argue that having many different cell phones available in the marketplace, each with different capabilities, is a good thing; however, one of the downsides is that the manufactures refuse to comply with universal standards for things like charger receptacles and so you end up needing to buy a new charger for every new phone. I have a box in one of my closets with probably 20 of them, and they're all different! Some have the same receptacle, but different output. Many are even from the same damn manufacturers and not transferable between different models of the same manufacture!!! *Wise observer blubbered:* Rick, what you describe is more a result of corporate greed than a good analogy for the ills of web programming, this is open source software, nobody is being paid. The developers are not intending to extort the lemmings under the guise of a self-induced hardware incompatibility . Yes you are correct, the motivation to fragment is not due to greedy wishes to become rich, no, the motivation is one of these two: * Selfishness: (They want to create something is new, but really just the same old $hit with a different name) * Static stubbornness of current module developers does not allow for change, so they are forced to start a new project. Either excuse causes damaging fragmentation of the community and the problem. It injects multiplicity and asininity. The so called choices (which are really the same thing with a a shiny new name tag) then become an obstacle for new users. The whole system slows to crawl, stagnates, and inevitably becomes extinct. This is the future of Python web programming (and the language itself) if we keep refusing to change from within. Fragmentation WILL destroy us. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
* rh richard_hubb...@lavabit.com [130307 20:21]: On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 17:55:12 -0900 Tim Johnson t...@akwebsoft.com wrote: I believe that indifference on the part of Python to fastcgi is a self-inflicted wound. I don't believe that there is any good excuse for such indifference, except for a sort of bureaucratic inertia. It's sad, when you consider how well python is designed Python is not indifferent to fastcgi, django is indifferent to fastcgi. and how crappily PHP is designed and how easy it is to set up and deploy drupal in the same environment. I speak from my own experience. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list I stand corrected, that was a typo. thanks -- Tim tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com http://www.akwebsoft.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 8, 9:50 am, rh richard_hubb...@lavabit.com wrote: Choices are good. Having one choice is a mess. And look back at history and current events if you don't see that. See http://www.perl.com/pub/1999/03/pm.html for how a real post-modern hip language gives endless choice. Also called TIMTOWTDI. Or perl -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:58:12 -0800, rusi wrote: My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? Where there is choice there is no freedom http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1954/1954-03-03-jiddu- krishnamurti-8th-public-talk Surely that should be, where there is NO choice there is no freedom. You must work down the mines every day until you die. Are you free? You must use Rails for your web app. Are you free? The Paradox of Choice is real, that is, *too* much choice can lead to paralysis. Freedom is not an unmitigated good. But there are ways to work around that, starting with the simple fact that products often are aimed at niche markets and so are not actually direct competitors. The hard part is deciding what niche you exist in, not what product you want. [...] GvR understood and rigorously implemented a dictum that Nicklaus Wirth formulated decades ago -- The most important thing about language design is what to leave out. Therefore Python is a beautiful language. Unfortunately the same leadership did not carry over to web frameworks and so we have a mess. The entire software ecosystem is not equivalent to designing a single language. Apart from the practical matter that it would require a totalitarian dictator to declare that there is One True web framework which everyone must use on pain of death, there is also the little matter that individual products can concentrate on different strengths. No one product can solve all problems -- you can't have a web framework which is simultaneously lightweight for those with small needs AND heavyweight for those with large needs. (Or at least, it is *incredibly difficult* to have a single product be all things to all people.) 'I'm sure we can pull together, sir.' Lord Vetinari raised his eyebrows. 'Oh, I do hope not, I really do hope not. Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny. Free men pull in all kinds of directions.' He smiled. 'It's the only way to make progress.' - Terry Pratchett, The Truth -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 8, 10:47 pm, Steven D'Aprano steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:58:12 -0800, rusi wrote: My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? Where there is choice there is no freedom http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1954/1954-03-03-jiddu-krishnamurti-8th-public-talk Surely that should be, where there is NO choice there is no freedom. The Paradox of Choice is real, that is, *too* much choice can lead to paralysis. Thanks for that 'google-tip'. I guess a secular outlook would have wider reach than a guru like Krishnamurti. In any case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less says more or less what Krishnamurti does (apart from the absolutes). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
rusi wrote: Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much spurious choice. This is a fallacy. Just because someone claims that there are 100 ways of doing something and none perfect, it doesn't mean that restricting choice leads to perfection. It doesn't. It only leads to getting stuck with a poor solution with no possibility of improving your life by switching to a better alternative. Worse, a complete lack of alternatives leads to a complete lack of competition, and therefore the absense of incentives to work on improvements. You know, progress. Choice is good. Don't pretend it isn't. It's one of the reasons we have stuff like Python or Ruby nowadays, for example. Rui Maciel -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On 7 March 2013 09:28, Rui Maciel rui.mac...@gmail.com wrote: rusi wrote: Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much spurious choice. This is a fallacy. Just because someone claims that there are 100 ways of doing something and none perfect, it doesn't mean that restricting choice leads to perfection. It doesn't. It only leads to getting stuck with a poor solution with no possibility of improving your life by switching to a better alternative. This thread reminds me of an article I read recently: http://rubiken.com/blog/2013/02/11/web-dev-a-crazy-world.html It's mostly a matter of having enough time to evaluate what's best for you. In the case of RoR vs Django, you will (assuming zero knowledge) need to learn a language, then a framework. That's quite a time consuming task. Personally I've opted for Django because I've used Python for years. I've written some Ruby in the past, but I not enough to make me choose RoR over Django to get stuff done. -- ./Sven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 3:28:41 AM UTC-6, Rui Maciel wrote: rusi wrote: Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much spurious choice. This is a fallacy. Just because someone claims that there are 100 ways of doing something and none perfect, it doesn't mean that restricting choice leads to perfection. It doesn't. It only leads to getting stuck with a poor solution with no possibility of improving your life by switching to a better alternative. Not true. The one solution is only poor when the dev team of that one solution become resistant to change. But i don't think anybody would agree that a *single* solution could exist for ALL problems (at least not in the early stages of defining a problem domain'), although a *single* solution could exist for MOST problems. Worse, a complete lack of alternatives leads to a complete lack of competition, and therefore the absense of incentives to work on improvements. You know, progress. Wrong again. You don't need 10 versions of the same software to maintain evolution. Your premise is that competition between multiple versions of, what is basically the same exact software with TINY difference, creates evolution; WRONG!; competition cannot exist without IDEAS, and it is the presence of conflicting IDEAS that create evolution in software development, NOT fragmentation. Fragmenting the pool of great software developers into zeoltry sects is slowing evolution. What you do need is a bare minimum of projects that are perpetually open to outside ideas and constant evolution. You goal should be to work towards a single monolithic solution. But you must also keep in mind that the single solution must continue to evolve. Choice is good. Don't pretend it isn't. It's one of the reasons we have stuff like Python or Ruby nowadays, for example. Python and Ruby should both be superseded by a language that takes the best from both languages. Python and Ruby are so much alike in so many ways it's really silly. I think the main split point at this time is the PythonZen vs TIMTOWDI. Sure there are some glaring differences in Ruby vs Python methodology, but at the end of the day, An iterator is an iterator, a class is a class, a sequence is a sequence, a mapping is a mapping, a conditional is a conditional, a variable is a variable. Python has list comprehensions and Ruby has Array.[select|collect]. But let's investigate a much better example where multiplicity has fragmented a problem domain into OBLIVION, and that domain is Graphical User Interfaces! Python has tons of them available. How many different versions of a GUI window do we REALLY need. People, a StaticText is a StaticText, a Dialog is a Dialog, a ProgressBar is a ProgressBar, an EditText is an EditText, a Canvas is a Canvas, a NoteBook is a NoteBook, a ListControl is a ListControl; BLAH! If we are going to split into sects, then we should at least abstract away the parts that we agree on, and then collectively EXTEND our selfish versions from that single abstraction. Do you people realize how far we could have evolved a single GUI library by now if we were not wasting our time re-inventing the same old widgets again and again just because we cannot agree on minutiae! You would rather fragment the community and slow evolution than to make compromises and produce something greater than the combination of ALL the multiple projects out there? Fragmentation is foolish. We need to focus or energies wisely and work towards a common goal. This is the path of intelligent evolution, not a billion years of naive dice rolling. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:20 AM, Rick Johnson rantingrickjohn...@gmail.com wrote: If we are going to split into sects, then we should at least abstract away the parts that we agree on, and then collectively EXTEND our selfish versions from that single abstraction. We've already done that. We've agreed that a program is stored in zero or more files. Everything after that is an extension from that basic abstraction. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 7, 2:52 pm, Sven sven...@gmail.com wrote: This thread reminds me of an article I read recently: http://rubiken.com/blog/2013/02/11/web-dev-a-crazy-world.html Ha Ha! Thanks for that. Of course its exaggerated. But then hyperbole can tell a story that logic cannot. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
In article 3d9fe0b2-7931-4ab6-8929-235460729...@q9g2000pbf.googlegroups.com, rusi rustompm...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 6, 11:03 pm, Jason Hsu jhsu802...@gmail.com wrote: I'm currently in the process of learning Ruby on Rails. I'm going through the Rails for Zombies tutorial, and I'm seeing the power of Rails. I still need to get a Ruby on Rails site up and running for the world to see. (My first serious RoR site will profile mutual funds from a value investor's point of view.) I have an existing web site and project called Doppler Value Investing (dopplervalueinvesting.com) that uses Drupal to display the web pages and Python web-scraping scripts to create *.csv and *.html files showing information on individual stocks. My site has a tacked-on feel to it, and I definitely want to change the setup. At a future time, I will rebuild my Doppler Value Investing web site in either Ruby on Rails or Django. The Ruby on Rails route will require rewriting my Python script in Ruby. The Django route will require learning Django. (I'm not sure which one will be easier.) My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? Where there is choice there is no freedom http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1954/1954-03-03-jiddu-krishnamurti-8th-pu blic-talk Python-for-web offered so much choice -- zope, django, turbogears, cherrypy, web.py etc etc -- that the newbie was completely drowned. With Ruby there is only one choice to make -- choose Ruby and rails follows. Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much spurious choice. GvR understood and rigorously implemented a dictum that Nicklaus Wirth formulated decades ago -- The most important thing about language design is what to leave out. Therefore Python is a beautiful language. Unfortunately the same leadership did not carry over to web frameworks and so we have a mess. I guess the situation is being corrected with google putting its artillery behind django. I strongly agree. The fact that there is no de-facto standard web system for Python is a major problem. Consider: - With too many choice one has no idea which projects will be maintained and which will be abandoned. - Expert knowledge among users is spread more thinly. - The effort of contributors is diluted. Years ago when I had some simple web programming to do I looked at the choices, gave up and used PHP (which I hated, but got the job done). If RoR had been available I would have been much happier using that. In my opinion the plethora of Python web frameworks is a serious detriment to trust and wider acceptance of Python for this use. If Django is becoming this standard, that is excellent news. Some choice is good, but in my opinion too much choice and lack of a de-facto standard are very detrimental. -- Russell -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 8, 2:08 am, Russell E. Owen ro...@uw.edu wrote: In article 3d9fe0b2-7931-4ab6-8929-235460729...@q9g2000pbf.googlegroups.com, rusi rustompm...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 6, 11:03 pm, Jason Hsu jhsu802...@gmail.com wrote: I'm currently in the process of learning Ruby on Rails. I'm going through the Rails for Zombies tutorial, and I'm seeing the power of Rails. I still need to get a Ruby on Rails site up and running for the world to see. (My first serious RoR site will profile mutual funds from a value investor's point of view.) I have an existing web site and project called Doppler Value Investing (dopplervalueinvesting.com) that uses Drupal to display the web pages and Python web-scraping scripts to create *.csv and *.html files showing information on individual stocks. My site has a tacked-on feel to it, and I definitely want to change the setup. At a future time, I will rebuild my Doppler Value Investing web site in either Ruby on Rails or Django. The Ruby on Rails route will require rewriting my Python script in Ruby. The Django route will require learning Django. (I'm not sure which one will be easier.) My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? Where there is choice there is no freedom http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1954/1954-03-03-jiddu-krishnamur... blic-talk Python-for-web offered so much choice -- zope, django, turbogears, cherrypy, web.py etc etc -- that the newbie was completely drowned. With Ruby there is only one choice to make -- choose Ruby and rails follows. Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much spurious choice. GvR understood and rigorously implemented a dictum that Nicklaus Wirth formulated decades ago -- The most important thing about language design is what to leave out. Therefore Python is a beautiful language. Unfortunately the same leadership did not carry over to web frameworks and so we have a mess. I guess the situation is being corrected with google putting its artillery behind django. I strongly agree. The fact that there is no de-facto standard web system for Python is a major problem. Consider: - With too many choice one has no idea which projects will be maintained and which will be abandoned. - Expert knowledge among users is spread more thinly. - The effort of contributors is diluted. Years ago when I had some simple web programming to do I looked at the choices, gave up and used PHP (which I hated, but got the job done). If RoR had been available I would have been much happier using that. In my opinion the plethora of Python web frameworks is a serious detriment to trust and wider acceptance of Python for this use. If Django is becoming this standard, that is excellent news. Some choice is good, but in my opinion too much choice and lack of a de-facto standard are very detrimental. -- Russell Hmm… I am not sure I agree with your agreement :-) Its not so much some choice vs too much choice as real choice vs spurious choice. Python or C or Haskell is a real choice. Python or Ruby is a spurious choice. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
I'm currently in the process of learning Ruby on Rails. I'm going through the Rails for Zombies tutorial, and I'm seeing the power of Rails. I still need to get a Ruby on Rails site up and running for the world to see. (My first serious RoR site will profile mutual funds from a value investor's point of view.) I have an existing web site and project called Doppler Value Investing (dopplervalueinvesting.com) that uses Drupal to display the web pages and Python web-scraping scripts to create *.csv and *.html files showing information on individual stocks. My site has a tacked-on feel to it, and I definitely want to change the setup. At a future time, I will rebuild my Doppler Value Investing web site in either Ruby on Rails or Django. The Ruby on Rails route will require rewriting my Python script in Ruby. The Django route will require learning Django. (I'm not sure which one will be easier.) My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? 2. Why is there a much stronger demand for Ruby on Rails developers than Django/Python developers? 3. If Doppler Value Investing were your project instead of mine, would you recommend the Ruby on Rails route or the Django route? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? AFAIK Rails got a slightly longer head start than Django. And it has been said that RoR's first killer app was a screencast. A little marketing can go a long way. Since then Django has caught up a bit with RoR in terms of maturity and adoption (I think this is in part because of RoR's adoption slowing due to it not being the NKOTB anymore (not to mention a few security embarrassments)) . 2. Why is there a much stronger demand for Ruby on Rails developers than Django/Python developers? I'm not sure how big the difference is, but it's probably related to its early(er) adoption. Same reason that there is a stronger demand for PHP coders. PHP hit it big first, so there is a lot more PHP code to maintain. 3. If Doppler Value Investing were your project instead of mine, would you recommend the Ruby on Rails route or the Django route? If you already know/work with Python than I would go the Django route. RoR and Django are not that much different nowadays as far as methodologies. The main differences I think between RoR and Django are that one is Ruby-based and one is Python-based. Other than that, if you can get used to one you can get used to the other. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
* mar...@python.net mar...@python.net [130306 09:31]: My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? If you already know/work with Python than I would go the Django route. RoR and Django are not that much different nowadays as far as methodologies. The main differences I think between RoR and Django are that one is Ruby-based and one is Python-based. Other than that, if you can get used to one you can get used to the other. I had problems getting django to work on my hostmonster account which is shared hosting and supports fast_cgi but not wsgi. I put that effort on hold for now, as it was just RD for me, but I would welcome you to take a look at this link where I opened a ticket. https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19970 From what I inferred there and from the django ML, the django community is indifferent to fastcgi and the shared hosting environment. As someone is new to shared hosting environments (I would mostly on dedicated servers) I get the impression that django is cutting itself out of some (if not a lot) of the market. I don't know about RoR tho -- Tim tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com http://www.akwebsoft.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 10:03:14 -0800, Jason Hsu wrote: My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? 2. Why is there a much stronger demand for Ruby on Rails developers than Django/Python developers? Fashion. Demand for technology is usually driven more by copying what everyone else does than by merit. Consider: Fred is a busy manager who has to start a new website and is dissatisfied with the technology he's previously been using. Does he have time to learn Ruby on Rails, Django, CherryPy, Drupal, and thirty other web technologies, to systematically and objectively decide on the best language for the website? Of course not. Even evaluating *two* technologies is probably beyond his time or budget constraints. So he does a search on the Internet, or reads trade magazines, or asks his peers, to find out what everyone else is doing, then copies them. Oh, they're using Ruby on Rails, it must be good. So now he decides to use Ruby on Rails, advertises for RoR developers, and the cycle continues. But is RoR actually better for his specific situation? Doubtful. Presumably RoR is better for *some* specific jobs. At some point, early in RoR's history, it must have been a *good* solution. But unlikely to be the *best* solution, just better than whatever people were using before. And so RoR will be the easy choice, not the best choice, until such time as RoR is no longer satisfying developers. And then there will be a sudden, and random, phase-change to some other tool, which will become the next easy choice. 3. If Doppler Value Investing were your project instead of mine, would you recommend the Ruby on Rails route or the Django route? Neither. I'd be rather tempted to try doing it in CherryPy. But then, what do I know, I'm just as much a follow of fashion as the next guy. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 7, 9:58 am, Steven D'Aprano steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Neither. I'd be rather tempted to try doing it in CherryPy. But then, what do I know, I'm just as much a follow of fashion as the next guy. All of the cool kids are using Pyramid these days. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013, at 02:16 PM, Tim Johnson wrote: I had problems getting django to work on my hostmonster account which is shared hosting and supports fast_cgi but not wsgi. I put that effort on hold for now, as it was just RD for me, but I would welcome you to take a look at this link where I opened a ticket. https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19970 From what I inferred there and from the django ML, the django community is indifferent to fastcgi and the shared hosting environment. As someone is new to shared hosting environments (I would mostly on dedicated servers) I get the impression that django is cutting itself out of some (if not a lot) of the market. I don't know about RoR tho I haven't any experience with shared hosting, so can't help you there. I did do some work with lighttpd and fast_cgi and the Django docs worked fine for that. But you're right. wsgi is pretty much the standard for web services in Python, like DB API is to relational database access. Ruby has Rack. Python has WSGI. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
* Albert Hopkins mar...@letterboxes.org [130306 17:14]: On Wed, Mar 6, 2013, at 02:16 PM, Tim Johnson wrote: I had problems getting django to work on my hostmonster account which is shared hosting and supports fast_cgi but not wsgi. I put that effort on hold for now, as it was just RD for me, but I would welcome you to take a look at this link where I opened a ticket. https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19970 From what I inferred there and from the django ML, the django community is indifferent to fastcgi and the shared hosting environment. As someone is new to shared hosting environments (I would mostly on dedicated servers) I get the impression that django is cutting itself out of some (if not a lot) of the market. I don't know about RoR tho I haven't any experience with shared hosting, so can't help you there. I did do some work with lighttpd and fast_cgi and the Django docs worked fine for that. But you're right. wsgi is pretty much the standard for web services in Python, like DB API is to relational database access. Ruby has Rack. Python has WSGI. I believe that indifference on the part of Python to fastcgi is a self-inflicted wound. I don't believe that there is any good excuse for such indifference, except for a sort of bureaucratic inertia. It's sad, when you consider how well python is designed and how crappily PHP is designed and how easy it is to set up and deploy drupal in the same environment. I speak from my own experience. respectfully : -- Tim tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com http://www.akwebsoft.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 6, 11:03 pm, Jason Hsu jhsu802...@gmail.com wrote: I'm currently in the process of learning Ruby on Rails. I'm going through the Rails for Zombies tutorial, and I'm seeing the power of Rails. I still need to get a Ruby on Rails site up and running for the world to see. (My first serious RoR site will profile mutual funds from a value investor's point of view.) I have an existing web site and project called Doppler Value Investing (dopplervalueinvesting.com) that uses Drupal to display the web pages and Python web-scraping scripts to create *.csv and *.html files showing information on individual stocks. My site has a tacked-on feel to it, and I definitely want to change the setup. At a future time, I will rebuild my Doppler Value Investing web site in either Ruby on Rails or Django. The Ruby on Rails route will require rewriting my Python script in Ruby. The Django route will require learning Django. (I'm not sure which one will be easier.) My questions: 1. Why is Ruby on Rails much more popular than Django? Where there is choice there is no freedom http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1954/1954-03-03-jiddu-krishnamurti-8th-public-talk Python-for-web offered so much choice -- zope, django, turbogears, cherrypy, web.py etc etc -- that the newbie was completely drowned. With Ruby there is only one choice to make -- choose Ruby and rails follows. Anyone who's used emacs will know this as the bane of FLOSS software -- 100 ways of doing something and none perfect -- IOW too much spurious choice. GvR understood and rigorously implemented a dictum that Nicklaus Wirth formulated decades ago -- The most important thing about language design is what to leave out. Therefore Python is a beautiful language. Unfortunately the same leadership did not carry over to web frameworks and so we have a mess. I guess the situation is being corrected with google putting its artillery behind django. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Mar 6, 11:03 pm, Jason Hsu jhsu802...@gmail.com wrote: I'm currently in the process of learning Ruby on Rails. I'm going through the Rails for Zombies tutorial, and I'm seeing the power of Rails. I still need to get a Ruby on Rails site up and running for the world to see. (My first serious RoR site will profile mutual funds from a value investor's point of view.) I have an existing web site and project called Doppler Value Investing (dopplervalueinvesting.com) that uses Drupal to display the web pages and Python web-scraping scripts to create *.csv and *.html files showing information on individual stocks. My site has a tacked-on feel to it, and I definitely want to change the setup. At a future time, I will rebuild my Doppler Value Investing web site in either Ruby on Rails or Django. The Ruby on Rails route will require rewriting my Python script in Ruby. The Django route will require learning Django. (I'm not sure which one will be easier.) It is a natural programmer instinct that a uni-language solution is felt cleaner than a multi-language one. This feeling is valid under the following assumptions: - You are starting from ground up - The investment in learning something new is not considered significant In your case, with a site already up (maybe with a tacked on feel) and learning django a significant effort compared to directly coding in RoR, you should look at polyglot solutions more carefully (eg not directly relevant ... something like http://www.igvita.com/2009/03/20/ruby-polyglot-talking-with-erlang/ ) IOW code your site in RoR and call out to your python scraper-scripts may be an option to consider. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why is Ruby on Rails more popular than Django?
On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 8:58:12 PM UTC-6, rusi wrote: Where there is choice there is no freedom [snip link] Python-for-web offered so much choice -- zope, django, turbogears, cherrypy, web.py etc etc -- that the newbie was completely drowned. With Ruby there is only one choice to make -- choose Ruby and rails follows. Indeed! Costco, a wholesale grocery chain, realized the same issue of consumers being drowned by multiplicity, and have been very successful by intelligently narrowing those choices for it's customer base. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: [Why not Ruby?] Becasue it is off topic in CL.perl.M just as in any other NG he posted to. Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his Oh my good, the idiot discovered alter egos. There is nothing wrong with a person expressing their opinion on any subject. Apparently some of you need to get laid and calm down a little. Xah has just as much right as anyone here to post his thoughts, even if they are off topic. Exactly everyone's point. He has exactly the same right as anybody else which is exactly that NOBODY has the right to post off topic posts. Sometimes they may be tolerated, on rare, special occasions even be welcome. But by and large they are as disturbing as playing 'Love me tender' during a perfomance of the Walkuere. I don't want to hear Elvis, I paid my money for Wagner! If I wanted to listen to Elvis, then I would go to an Elvis concert. Look, if you don't like what he is saying, DON'T F'IN READ IT! He has been plonked a lng time ago. It's just he newcomers, who still respond to him. And no his alter ego with the unpronouncable name of rt8396. Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star 410 ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are There are neither profiles nor stars or ratings on Usenet. Keep you made-up nonsense to yourself. jue -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 2, 6:54 pm, Gerry Reno gr...@verizon.net wrote: There's been almost 50 responses to this rubbish post. Could you please all stop! Donde es Xah Lee? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Hey Lee, I really like your overview of the official Python tut, it's spot on, and your study of OOP was quite fascinating! I like people who are honest and not afraid to go up against the status quo, although i will admit you go a little further than i might at times :). But the world needs an enema from time to time. Revolution is my name! Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his insights of languages and tech is fascinating. The man lives in a world driven by common sense, and you know what they say --Common sense is the least most common thing-- just look around at the responses here. I come from a different world than IT, and I thought initially the IT world would be filled with intelligent, free thinking, and open minded people... BOY was i wrong! I would not turn my back on these people for a second, lest you catch a knife in it! I find it laughable how people hate you so much, but would still take the time to reply to your post, just so they can call you a troll. You are not a troll Xah, but your posts do expose the true trolls and their minions. Instead of engaging in any sort of intellectual conversation, they spit 3 grade insults and try to discredit you. There is nothing wrong with a person expressing their opinion on any subject. Apparently some of you need to get laid and calm down a little. Xah has just as much right as anyone here to post his thoughts, even if they are off topic. Look, if you don't like what he is saying, DON'T F'IN READ IT! Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star 410 ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are from my supposed brothers here at c.l.py. Just letting you know there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world that did not contain an Xah lee. Keep up the good work my brother, you have much more to give! Thanks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Randal L. Schwartz mer...@stonehenge.com wrote in message news:861vvnqqzl@blue.stonehenge.com... r == r rt8...@gmail.com writes: r Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you r have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star 410 r ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star r and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are r from my supposed brothers here at c.l.py. Just letting you know r there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world r that did not contain an Xah lee. Since Usenet has neither stars nor ratings, you are hallucinating. Care to elaborate? Google groups' corrupting influence... P -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
En Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:00:01 -0200, r rt8...@gmail.com escribió: Steven i got you NOW! Everybody go and look at this thread, there Mr. Makinzie butts in and posts an off-topic question, and Steven answers it, contributing to the off-topicalitly of the thread. And has yet to apologize for it, or Does the word annoyness exist? You're getting high scores on my ranking. -- Gabriel Genellina -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 5, 7:31 am, Tim Rowe digi...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/1/1 r rt8...@gmail.com: I am beginning to think the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus. I spent quite a few evenings looking at Ruby, and didn't find a single thing I liked (and I certainly didn't find it elegant, as the original poster described it). What do you see in it that you think would be good in Python? Remember, put in too many shortcuts and you'll end up with code that's as unmaintainable as Perl! -- Tim Rowe Hello Tim, I think mainly i was just talking out of my bum. I am forced to learn Ruby because it is the only API available for one of my favorite applications. I lament every day that Python was not chosen for the API, not only for myself, but for the poor users who must deal with Ruby's backward way of doing things. I really think Python is the best high level language available today and teaches it's users more than meets-the-eye. I quite enjoy writing Python code, and learned the language very quickly despite the fact that i had no prior programming experience, and very little computer experience in general -- indecently Ruby was the first high level language i tried :) There were a few things initially that i -thought- i liked better about Ruby, but after much consideration, have decided they are not better, and are actually complete rubbish. If i had a choice i would much rather invest my time learning Perl than Ruby. I -will- never get over the use of end, especially since indentation is allowed. In a language that is as supposedly high level as Ruby, this is moronic- monkey-drivel. This complete ludicrisness, coupled with archaic thought processes, is completely redundant, bombastically asinine, and morbidly irreprehensible. Which in turn evaluates to this plague of human excrement we must plow through each and every day! I could could go on and on for hours bashing Ruby, but i should probably stop here before somebody gets upset although i am sure that i will be viciously lambasted for what i have already said.(Pssft-- some people around here are quite touchy!) So let the tongue lashings begin! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
2009/1/1 r rt8...@gmail.com: I am beginning to think the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus. I spent quite a few evenings looking at Ruby, and didn't find a single thing I liked (and I certainly didn't find it elegant, as the original poster described it). What do you see in it that you think would be good in Python? Remember, put in too many shortcuts and you'll end up with code that's as unmaintainable as Perl! -- Tim Rowe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 09:00:01 -0800, r wrote: On Jan 2, 6:45 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au wrote: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:38:02 -0800, r wrote: He was not cross posting. You don't actually know what cross-posting is, do you? You've just earned a plonking for the next month. Do try to have at least half a clue by February. Steven i got you NOW! Everybody go and look at this thread, there Mr. Makinzie butts in and posts an off-topic question, and Steven answers it, contributing to the off-topicalitly of the thread. And has yet to apologize for it, or admit his screwup, but will he preach to everyone else about making off topic post... Pot meet Kettle; Kettle Pot! http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/ fc57c18c3cff5937?hl=enq=recycle+bin#97254d877903bbd No you didn't got Steven, as unnecessary cross posting is something different than answering a question that should have been a new thread start. Oh, and: *plonk* for your childish annoying behaviour… Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 3:55 am, Roger rdcol...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 31, 12:55 pm, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. Who are you? In case no one tells you, you are a cocky, egotistical windbag with opinions that border constructive but never gets there. Why would anyone care what you think? Again, who are you? Xah Lee? And? I didn't subscribe to read reviews on Ruby. And I'm pretty sure anyone that bothers to subscribe to a group about programming has the wherewithal to research a language themselves and come to their own determiniation. Also, this is a Python group and not Ruby. I knew I should have avoided this post and read the one about Nike Shoes from China. At least those bits of trolling spam don't try to mask themselves as something worthwhile. agree with you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 16:19:38 -0800, Fuzzyman wrote: On Jan 2, 12:16 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au wrote: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:32:53 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote: On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years I'll get around to writing one. You don't think Python's dict implementation is functional? That's pretty strange, Python dicts are the basis of much of the language. They certainly work, and work well, what makes you think they aren't functional? What does Data.Map do that dicts don't? He almost certainly (I assume) means functional in the way that Haskell is a functional language. *slaps head* D'oh! Er, I mean... Of course, I knew that, I was checking to see if anyone else did. *cough* -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Steven D'Aprano a écrit : On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 10:35:54 -0800, r wrote: (snip stupid troll) You really are an idiot. Steven, this bozo is just another Xah Lee, so don't waste your time with him. We all know how to deal with trolls, don't we ? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:38:02 -0800, r wrote: He was not cross posting. You don't actually know what cross-posting is, do you? You've just earned a plonking for the next month. Do try to have at least half a clue by February. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On 02 Jan 2009 12:45:36 GMT Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au wrote: You've just earned a plonking for the next month. Do try to have at least half a clue by February. I will state again that there seems to have been a slight change of tone in clp lately. How about we Python guys work a bit harder on not calling each other names and such? Not that I have a particular problem with *what* Steven said here, but it could have been phrased a tad more calmly, just for the sake of not stirring up unnecessary feelings of defiance. /W -- My real email address is constructed by swapping the domain with the recipient (local part). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Please show some restraint (Was: Why not Ruby?)
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 00:57:06 +0100 Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com wrote: You clearly have a personal issue with Xah Lee. Possibly it is better you killfile him or your spring will over wind :-; What good does a killfile do if people insist on repeating his posts in their entirety? Please people, try to resist the urge to reply to every post that raises your blood pressure a point or two but if you must reply, please trim. Anyone can always go back and review a previous message if they need more context. Heck, we can even review messages posted by people in our killfile. Personally, if I can't see your reply without scrolling down I just tend to hit the delete key. That means that thanks to you non-trimmers I get to read Xah posts over and over but never get to see your witty, entertaining and educational replies. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain da...@druid.net | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 2, 6:45 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au wrote: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:38:02 -0800, r wrote: He was not cross posting. You don't actually know what cross-posting is, do you? You've just earned a plonking for the next month. Do try to have at least half a clue by February. -- Steven Steven i got you NOW! Everybody go and look at this thread, there Mr. Makinzie butts in and posts an off-topic question, and Steven answers it, contributing to the off-topicalitly of the thread. And has yet to apologize for it, or admit his screwup, but will he preach to everyone else about making off topic post... Pot meet Kettle; Kettle Pot! http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/fc57c18c3cff5937?hl=enq=recycle+bin#97254d877903bbd -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Xah Lee wrote: Q: Do you condemn Ruby? No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them, are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. There is one thing that Ruby is exceptionally good for and that is replacing COBOL and Visual Basic as the programming languages for non-programmers. It's dead boring as a language but somebody who is an accountant or something could make some okayish tools for personal use in it. Next point. If your going to post this sort of thing _only_ post to comp.programming and _never_ post what is on your website. Just put it into your sig block. Quote of the login: Computers don't actually think. You just think they think. (We think.) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 01 Jan 2009: Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why. How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Sometimes crossposting can be useful. But you ought to at least be aware of some of the possible drawbacks, e.g. expressed here: http://www.nhplace.com/kent/PFAQ/cross-posting.html In particular, the usual hope by the poster is that the content is relevant to the union of people in the different groups, but the actual experience is that it is often relevant only to the intersection of such people. And, moreover, that a long cross-posted thread on controversial topics often winds up with people talking at cross-purposes past each other, because they don't share enough common values to have a useful conversation. In particular, the poster that started this thread is well known for adding far more noise than signal to any discussion, and for showing no interest in the greater good of any of the communities, but only in his own glorification. You labor under the delusion that there is at least good intent here, and the poster ought to receive the benefit of the doubt. Long prior experience shows that this hope is misplaced. -- Don ___ Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ d...@geddis.org The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. -- John Stuart Mill, _On Liberty_ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Don Geddis wrote: Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 01 Jan 2009: Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why. How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Sometimes crossposting can be useful. But you ought to at least be aware of some of the possible drawbacks, e.g. expressed here: http://www.nhplace.com/kent/PFAQ/cross-posting.html In particular, the usual hope by the poster is that the content is relevant to the union of people in the different groups, but the actual experience is that it is often relevant only to the intersection of such people. And, moreover, that a long cross-posted thread on controversial topics often winds up with people talking at cross-purposes past each other, because they don't share enough common values to have a useful conversation. In particular, the poster that started this thread is well known for adding far more noise than signal to any discussion, and for showing no interest in the greater good of any of the communities, but only in his own glorification. You labor under the delusion that there is at least good intent here, and the poster ought to receive the benefit of the doubt. Long prior experience shows that this hope is misplaced. -- Don Thank you, Don, for outlining the issue far more eloquently than I was able to. Also, to be clear, I don't think anyone's upset that people find his posts interesting, but it doesn't make it so for everyone else (or assign them any ailment if they don't see it that way) -- especially in regard to the other groups he cross posts to (of which one should have specifically been the ruby group, but I digress.) -- Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc. Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated Semi-Dedicated servers and Custom Hosting. 24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers. Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
There's been almost 50 responses to this rubbish post. Could you please all stop! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
r == r rt8...@gmail.com writes: r Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you r have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star 410 r ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star r and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are r from my supposed brothers here at c.l.py. Just letting you know r there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world r that did not contain an Xah lee. Since Usenet has neither stars nor ratings, you are hallucinating. Care to elaborate? -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
s...@netherlands.com wrote: On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:16:41 -0500, Kenneth Tilton kentil...@gmail.com wrote: Xah Lee wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. * Why Not Ruby? http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html plain text version follows: -- Why Not Ruby? Xah Lee, 2008-12-31 Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. The articles i read in detail are: * Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)¨J. Gives general overview. * Brief tutorial: Ruby in Twenty Minutes http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/ * Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10. http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The Ruby in Twenty Minutes is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it because his opinions i respect. Q: Will you learn Ruby? No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study, functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby. Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant? Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript, Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than Scheme, and probably same as Javascript. I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword end to indicate code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like that. Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience? No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl, Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time (roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo- jumbo with its Python 3 brand new future.) There is absolutely nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp, Scheme lisp. Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then? Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc. Q: Do you condemn Ruby? No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them, are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See: Proliferation of Computing Languages. Kenny Tilton, 2008-12-31 Q: Why not Xah's review of Ruby? Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. A. Three hours? I've had belches that lasted longer than that. Of course, a true master can tell a lot in just a few hours of coding with a new language... The articles i read in detail are: Q: Read?! A: That's what he said. hth,kzo Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's guts out in a second. Sorry, my new President has banned drama so I will only be responding pleasantly to civil comments. (This has been a non-responding response.) Peace,k -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
In comp.lang.lisp r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his insights of languages and tech is fascinating. The man lives in a world driven by common sense, and you know what they say --Common sense is the least most common thing-- just look around at the responses here. Might hold true for some rants, but most of it's tl;dr drivel. For instance, his critique of Lisp's homoiconicity is completely off-target. I come from a different world than IT, and I thought initially the IT world would be filled with intelligent, free thinking, and open minded people... BOY was i wrong! I would not turn my back on these people for a second, lest you catch a knife in it! So-called IT is driven by capitalistic impulses. Dijkstra and his followers get dismissed as ivory tower intellectuals. FUT warning. -- You only have power over people so long as you don’t take everything away from them. But when you’ve robbed a man of everything he’s no longer in your power — he’s free again. -- Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 2:05 am, Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I think if you will consider society as a whole, you will see that most people don't display much sense at all. Joe Blow only cares about paris hilton, britney spears, or janet jackson wardrobe malfunctions. The only thing they contribute to society is human excrement. So --Common sense is the least most common thing-- really means there exists no sense as a commonality. This can apply to higher educated people too, even Guido. Go and read Xahs take on the Python official tutorial, you will find your self agreeing with everything that he says. Guido filled it with so much fluff and off topic BS, causing the learning process to shut down. The only kind of person that might find it enjoying would be a fellow Computer Science Graduate. I did not know it at the time but this contributed to my late understanding of classes and regexes. And being such a fanboy of Python and carrying such a high respect for Guido that is hard for me to say, BUT it is the TRUTH nonetheless. Guido has no business writing tutorials anymore, WHY you ask. Because he is too smart, and too much on the inside. He cannot relate to the n00b pythoneer, he has crossed the Rubicon. Less fluff more simple examples are the key to quick learning. My love for python has blinded me to some of the atrocities that exist here. I have many more examples from the Official-TUT than Xah covered. Don't take my word, judge for yourself... http://xahlee.org/perl-python/xlali_skami_cukta.html here is Xah's take on OOP, very good reading for beginners and Gurus... http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/t2/oop.html If all Xah did was come here and say Hey, python sucks donkey dicks!, i would pay him no mind. But he brings much intelligence, and vigor to an otherwise boring, and sometimes mindless newsgroup. What i like about him is his out-side-the-box thinking style. He does not give in to this BS Proper Society wants to push onto us. He is a real rebel, but WITH a cause! And the cause is to bring common sense back to a world of fluff an BS jargonisms. I don't always agree with his thoughts, but most the time he's spot on. Open your min c.l.py. Lest it close forever. eliminate the life decline... its time to change... can't stay the same... Revolution is my name! -Phil Anselmo- -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Xah Lee, I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword end to indicate code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like that. You could not be more right Xah, the use of end in a language as high level as Ruby is redundant, and idiotic. There are a few things about Ruby i really like, but this end business is blasphemy. If ruby did not use indentation, i would see the need for end, or braces, or whatever, but why use both indentation AND the end word? Such stupidity. I guess Mats thought Ruby would look too much like Python, ARE YOU KIDDING MATS?, you already took so much from Python anyway, dropping the end statement won't change that. And heck, you will gain many new users with out it's archaic redundancy I must say at first i did not like the each method but it has grow on me because of its space saving attributes. There are also some nice shortcuts in Ruby that do not exist in Python. I am beginning to think the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus. I would probably lean more towards python scoping and classes than ruby, but python classes need a little less redundancy also. Of course pythons list, dict, strings in my opinion just can't be beat, and regex forget-a-about-it! Python rules here. Even though Ruby has built in support, python's is much more elegant. I really like pythons handling of modules and module.class.method syntax. Both languages have much to offer, i believe though Python has a better base, it just needs some cleaning up, and shortcut syntax so moderate/Gurus don't develop carpal tunnel too early :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, s...@netherlands.com wrote: On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:16:41 -0500, Kenneth Tilton kentil...@gmail.com wrote: Xah Lee wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's guts out in a second. sln Too much champagne? A guy (XL) is sometimes off topic and I don't always agree with his postings - if I find the subject somewhat worthy, I usually skim through it, this is how I have found myself knee deep in this strange exchange between XL's supporters and opponents. And his website is big like a magazine and full of strange, sometimes not interesting or hard to assess stuff (it needs time to read and time is hard to find nowadays). But sometimes, what he writes is informative, too. A bit redundant but still, I would give him a small plus, rather than zero or minus. But I do not remember him being blunt or agressive. Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did rm -rif on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com ** -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
r rt8...@gmail.com writes: I am beginning to think the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus. You might like Tim Sweeney's POPL talk: http://www.st.cs.uni-saarland.de/edu/seminare/2005/advanced-fp/docs/sweeny.pdf Of course pythons list, dict, strings in my opinion just can't be beat, On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years I'll get around to writing one. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 8:32 pm, Paul Rubin http://phr...@nospam.invalid wrote: [snip...] Of course pythons list, dict, strings in my opinion just can't be beat, On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years I'll get around to writing one. Care to save me the effort of looking it up and tell me what Data.Map does that Python's dict doesn't? I guess if it is functional then every mutation must copy and return a new data structure? (Which will be much more efficient in Haskell than in Python - Haskell can share most of the underlying data whereas Python would have to create a new dict every time. At least it only stores references.) Michael Foord -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his points. And they argue the man because he refuses to be brow beaten by those who do not like to be criticised or are too think skinned. I rarely find his posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive evidence and rarely with because I'm experienced and thats the way it is - something not every one takes the time to do. He is clearly intelligent, thoughtful and experienced if a little lacking in finesse at times. The world needs more Xah lees. -- important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
r rt8...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 2:05 am, Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I think if you will consider society as a whole, you will see that most people don't display much sense at all. Joe Blow only cares about paris hilton, britney spears, or janet jackson wardrobe malfunctions. The only thing they contribute to society is human excrement. So --Common sense is the least most common thing-- really means there exists no sense as a commonality. This can apply to higher educated people too, even Guido. Go and read Xahs take on the Python official tutorial, you will find your self agreeing with everything that he says. Guido filled it with so much fluff and off topic BS, causing the learning process to shut down. The only kind of person that might find it enjoying would be a fellow Computer Science Graduate. I did not know it at the time but this contributed to my late understanding of classes and regexes. And being such a fanboy of Python and carrying such a high respect for Guido that is hard for me to say, BUT it is the TRUTH nonetheless. Guido has no business writing tutorials anymore, WHY you ask. Because he is too smart, and too much on the inside. He cannot relate to the n00b pythoneer, he has crossed the Rubicon. Less fluff more simple examples are the key to quick learning. My love for python has blinded me to some of the atrocities that exist here. I have many more examples from the Official-TUT than Xah covered. Don't take my word, judge for yourself... http://xahlee.org/perl-python/xlali_skami_cukta.html here is Xah's take on OOP, very good reading for beginners and Gurus... http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/t2/oop.html If all Xah did was come here and say Hey, python sucks donkey dicks!, i would pay him no mind. But he brings much intelligence, and vigor to an otherwise boring, and sometimes mindless newsgroup. What i like about him is his out-side-the-box thinking style. He does not give in to this BS Proper Society wants to push onto us. He is a real rebel, but WITH a cause! And the cause is to bring common sense back to a world of fluff an BS jargonisms. I don't always agree with his thoughts, but most the time he's spot on. Open your min c.l.py. Lest it close forever. Great post and I agree with you 100%. -- important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: This is not a Ruby group. I recommend you to go waste your time there. That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best to just filter the guy's posts. No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why. How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Most news readers feature a kill thread command if you are not interested in the content. Certainly less extreme or ignorant than killing all posts from someone who clearly has interesting things to say about development practises and tools. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote: posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive Programmers don't move to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for those who like Lisp). Tamas -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Tamas K Papp tkp...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote: posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive Programmers don't move to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for those who like Lisp). Tamas move to Elisp was clearly meant as moving towards it in order to use it. In this case to modify emacs. And to suggest that jobs of work are not done in Emacs is ridiculous. I am at a loss to really understand what you mean here in the context. -- important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com writes: Tamas K Papp tkp...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote: posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive Programmers don't move to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for those who like Lisp). Tamas move to Elisp was clearly meant as moving towards it in order to use it. In this case to modify emacs. And to suggest that jobs of work are not done in Emacs is ridiculous. I am at a loss to really understand what you mean here in the context. OK, how about this: Xah's elisp code stinks to high heaven. His code should not be studied by anybody who actually wants to actually learn elisp (or anything else). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com wrote: Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his points. And they argue the man because he refuses to be brow beaten by those who do not like to be criticised or are too think skinned. I rarely find his posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive evidence and rarely with because I'm experienced and thats the way it is - something not every one takes the time to do. He is clearly intelligent, thoughtful and experienced if a little lacking in finesse at times. The world needs more Xah lees. If this were an Elisp/Mathematica/Ruby group, those posts would be fine. It isn't just the content of the posts, it's their subject that gets on everyone's nerves. We don't want to hear about Elisp tutorials or why Mathematica is superior to Python. We want to hear about Python. This isn't people being closed-minded, it's about people trying to keep comp.lang.* python* focused on python. If we want to hear about Elisp, we'd ask about it on an emacs or a lisp group. If we want to hear about Mathematica, we'd ask Wolfram for help. If Xah Lee came to the group with posts that constituted general discussions and questions about Python people on the list wouldn't get so annoyed. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley wrote: Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: This is not a Ruby group. I recommend you to go waste your time there. That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best to just filter the guy's posts. No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why. How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Most news readers feature a kill thread command if you are not interested in the content. Certainly less extreme or ignorant than killing all posts from someone who clearly has interesting things to say about development practises and tools. Don't get so wound up because people in groups he cross posts this junk to actually don't want to see it. This poster is hardly interesting or offering anything intelligent. This poster has a history of posting things that he is personally interested in arguing about, and posting it in groups that are not about the languages he chooses to complain about. There is no rhyme or reason to post in the Perl news group, for example, if you're complaining about Ruby. This is not even close to the first time this has happened, much like his relentless posts about Mathematica (again, cross posted to several groups, including Perl). This user has a specific bias and is trolling to get a rise out of people by picking random languages and trying to cut them down, claiming *his* opinions (based on lack of insights, ironically) are superior. He does this often, and always cross posts to several groups that are completely irrelevant to his argument. The fact you actually buy into this nonsense, actually doesn't make anyone else wrong or ignorant for not agreeing with him, or falling for it. In fact, it means exactly the opposite. If he had something actually interesting and/or relevant, then his rants would be more tolerated by users of these groups. However, since he offers none of those aspects, this is why you see people voice their grievances. Look at this in its basic element, if you don't believe what people say -- this user didn't post the topic in the most revelant group (being the ruby group), and each time he goes off on another misguided tangent, several people prove him wrong, and it doesn't phase him or change anything -- he just continues to cross post. Like I said, if you think he's interesting, fine. However, many people don't. Perhaps as you learn more about programming, development and specific tools and practices, you'll come to realize this fact as well. In the meantime, the irony is probably lost when you actually believe he is offering something of substance, interest or that people whom know better are somehow ignorant. -- Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc. Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated Semi-Dedicated servers and Custom Hosting. 24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers. Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley wrote: Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his points. And they argue the man because he refuses to be brow beaten by those who do not like to be criticised or are too think skinned. I rarely find his posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive evidence and rarely with because I'm experienced and thats the way it is - something not every one takes the time to do. He is clearly intelligent, thoughtful and experienced if a little lacking in finesse at times. The world needs more Xah lees. You say he's intelligent and interesting, others see it as the opposite. If you want to read his rants, by all means. However, there have been many, many posts there this poster was proven wrong. That is when the poster become more belligerent, off topic, and vulgar. That is not the actions of an intelligent person that's staying on topic or providing anything interesting. The only thing I find interesting, is two anonymous posters from gmail.com rushing to his defense, especially in light of the fact that few people share your version of this person's talents. I'm not trying to be mean, but the guy is what people call a usenet troll. By all means, be his fan, but don't encourage his cross posting trolling as a means to provoke interesting, intelligent debating (because he's not and it's absolutely not his intention). Believe what you want, though, and I'll believe what I know. -- Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc. Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated Semi-Dedicated servers and Custom Hosting. 24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers. Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley wrote: Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his points. Precisely, and thus they are the trolls: few of them trim followups, and all of them try to sound funny or clever in their attacks. Xah has something to say about technology, like what he says or not. His attackers just see an open mike and want to hear the sound of their own voice, which I certainly understand. And before anyone goes for that old argument from self-reference, the madding crowd succeeded once in their harrassment of The Xah so remaining silent is no option. p,k -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Raymond Wiker r...@rawmbp.local writes: Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com writes: Tamas K Papp tkp...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote: posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive Programmers don't move to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for those who like Lisp). Tamas move to Elisp was clearly meant as moving towards it in order to use it. In this case to modify emacs. And to suggest that jobs of work are not done in Emacs is ridiculous. I am at a loss to really understand what you mean here in the context. OK, how about this: Xah's elisp code stinks to high heaven. His code should not be studied by anybody who actually wants to actually learn elisp (or anything else). I found his tutorial easy to use and very convenient for finding out how to do things quickly and easily. I grant you that possibly thats not the way to be a true Elisp god, but for getting things done in a timely and efficient manner I thought it was good. Clearly Xah Lee stirs up some strong emotions here. I can only go on what I have read from him and I find him interesting and always willing to back up his own research and views. -- important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: Richard Riley wrote: Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: This is not a Ruby group. I recommend you to go waste your time there. That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best to just filter the guy's posts. No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why. How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Most news readers feature a kill thread command if you are not interested in the content. Certainly less extreme or ignorant than killing all posts from someone who clearly has interesting things to say about development practises and tools. Don't get so wound up because people in groups he cross posts this junk Wound up? I am not wound up in any shape or form. I am suggesting the opposite. It seems you are the one a little wound up. So wound up in fact you are taking it on yourself to tell people who they should or should not read. to actually don't want to see it. This poster is hardly interesting or offering anything intelligent. This poster has a history of posting things that he is personally interested in arguing about, and posting it in groups that are not about the languages he chooses to complain about. There is no rhyme or reason to post in the Perl news group, for You dont seem to think that a comparison article is relevant in the groups dedicated to the languages he compares too? OK. I do. You are, of course, welcome to your opinion and I certainly would not tell you who to read or not read. I would suggest that not everyone woul agree with you and that telling people who to killfile is not at all constructive. example, if you're complaining about Ruby. This is not even close to the first time this has happened, much like his relentless posts about Mathematica (again, cross posted to several groups, including Perl). This user has a specific bias and is trolling to get a rise out of people by picking random languages and trying to cut them down, claiming *his* opinions (based on lack of insights, ironically) are superior. He does this often, and always cross posts to several groups that are completely irrelevant to his argument. You clearly have a personal issue with Xah Lee. Possibly it is better you killfile him or your spring will over wind :-; regards, r. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Kenneth Tilton kentil...@gmail.com writes: Richard Riley wrote: Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his points. Precisely, and thus they are the trolls: few of them trim followups, and all of them try to sound funny or clever in their attacks. Xah has something to say about technology, like what he says or not. His attackers just see an open mike and want to hear the sound of their own voice, which I certainly understand. And before anyone goes for that old argument from self-reference, the madding crowd succeeded once in their harrassment of The Xah so remaining silent is no option. p,k It's good to see I am not alone in my views on some of the more aggressive posters who seem to take delight in attacking Xah Lee. I was wondering if I had backed myself into a corner with no chance of escape for a moment. I found the comments on his elisp tutorial and reference particularly offensive and destructive considering I know it to be of at least some use as I referred to it quite a bit when trying some basic customisations. -- important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley rileyrg...@gmail.com wrote: discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Most news readers feature a kill thread command if you are not interested in the content. Certainly less extreme or ignorant than killing all posts from someone Thank you for reminding me *PLONK* jue -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Kenneth Tilton kentil...@gmail.com wrote: Xah has something to say about technology, like what he says or not. Unfortunately it's unrelated to the topics the NGs he is spamming. *PLONK* jue -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:32:53 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote: On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years I'll get around to writing one. You don't think Python's dict implementation is functional? That's pretty strange, Python dicts are the basis of much of the language. They certainly work, and work well, what makes you think they aren't functional? What does Data.Map do that dicts don't? Oh, and Paul, you've been around long enough that you should know better than to be cross-posting like you did. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Richard Riley wrote: Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: Richard Riley wrote: Tim Greer t...@burlyhost.com writes: Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: This is not a Ruby group. I recommend you to go waste your time there. That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best to just filter the guy's posts. No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why. How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Most news readers feature a kill thread command if you are not interested in the content. Certainly less extreme or ignorant than killing all posts from someone who clearly has interesting things to say about development practises and tools. Don't get so wound up because people in groups he cross posts this junk Wound up? Yes, I'd say that accusing people of bring ignorant and attacking them for not sharing your view on the irrelevant cross posting and trolling of the Xah poster, is indeed an indication that you appear to be wound up. Perhaps you've not seen the posts and threads he's made that I've seen? Perhaps I've not seen the one's you have? Either way, the one's I have, have all been either self serving garbage about his own personal feelings that he attempts to covey as fact with his overbearing arrogance, or it's simply to attack others for not sharing his view. I find that ironic. He attacks others, acting belligerent, and you attack those that simply say he's better ignored. I am not wound up in any shape or form. Then convey that in your attitude when replying to others you don't know anything about, and try and be civil and not accuse people you don't know. I am suggesting the opposite. Suggesting it by doing exactly what you're saying people should not do? It seems you are the one a little wound up. Nope, I responded to your attempts to provoke an issue, when you accused myself and others of being ignorant for not sharing your view regarding the Xah poster. So wound up in fact you are taking it on yourself to tell people who they should or should not read. A suggestion is not an instruction or demand. You listed reasons why you believed those that didn't agree with you were wrong and ignorant, and I listed reasons in response to your claim to dispute it. to actually don't want to see it. This poster is hardly interesting or offering anything intelligent. This poster has a history of posting things that he is personally interested in arguing about, and posting it in groups that are not about the languages he chooses to complain about. There is no rhyme or reason to post in the Perl news group, for You dont seem to think that a comparison article is relevant in the groups dedicated to the languages he compares too? No. Not when it's just his own feelings about the languages. A lot of people have their personal feelings about various languages, imagine all of the pollution we'd see if everyone was as arrogant as this guy, all posting their views as if they are the authority on the matter? Again, going by that deduction, what do you suppose explains his failure to consider posting this in the ruby group itself, since that is the primary (and actually, only) relevant group (dismissing his personal views)? OK. I do. If you do, that's fine. However, many people in the Perl group, which I'm seeing this thread, have voiced their issues with this poster's relentless postings of this nature. I did as well, in this new thread. You are, of course, welcome to your opinion and I certainly would not tell you who to read or not read. I can appreciate that, and I didn't tell you to do anything though, now did I? I would suggest that not everyone woul agree with you and that telling people who to killfile is not at all constructive. Of course I don't expect everyone to agree with me. The poster that replied displayed annoyance at seeing the off topic, self serving and trollish post that this Xah poster is known for (at least in this group), and in response to *that*, I had suggested they don't take him seriously, and this is what he does (in my experience). There's no reason to read more into it and start claiming people are ignorant for not agreeing with you. And, I think it's perfectly constructive to advise someone that this isn't abnormal, and for future reference, to consider such an option if they are too annoyed by it. example, if you're complaining about Ruby. This is not even close to the first time this has happened, much like his relentless posts about Mathematica (again, cross posted to several groups, including Perl). This user has a specific bias and is trolling to get a rise out of people by picking random languages and trying to cut them down, claiming *his* opinions (based on lack of insights, ironically) are superior. He does
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 2, 12:16 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au wrote: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:32:53 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote: On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years I'll get around to writing one. You don't think Python's dict implementation is functional? That's pretty strange, Python dicts are the basis of much of the language. They certainly work, and work well, what makes you think they aren't functional? What does Data.Map do that dicts don't? He almost certainly (I assume) means functional in the way that Haskell is a functional language. Michael Foord -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 5:34 pm, Kenneth Tilton kentil...@gmail.com wrote: Richard Riley wrote: Jason Rumney jasonrum...@gmail.com writes: On Jan 1, 3:12 pm, r rt8...@gmail.com wrote: The man lives in a world driven by common sense Common sense suggests that his views are shared among the general populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never- ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little more carefully sometimes. I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his points. Precisely, and thus they are the trolls: few of them trim followups, and all of them try to sound funny or clever in their attacks. Xah has something to say about technology, like what he says or not. His attackers just see an open mike and want to hear the sound of their own voice, which I certainly understand. And before anyone goes for that old argument from self-reference, the madding crowd succeeded once in their harrassment of The Xah so remaining silent is no option. p,k Good Point, Starting a new thread is not off topic no matter what subject. I have never witnessed a time where Xah jumped in the middle of a thread and started a ruckus(i could be wrong), But i do see many interrupting Xah's threads or any thread for that matter that they feel is irrelevant to them. The topic of a thread is it's title. Here, the title is Why Not Ruby. I am the only person yet to offer argument for or against Ruby here. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 6:16 pm, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au wrote: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:32:53 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote: On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years I'll get around to writing one. You don't think Python's dict implementation is functional? That's pretty strange, Python dicts are the basis of much of the language. They certainly work, and work well, what makes you think they aren't functional? What does Data.Map do that dicts don't? Oh, and Paul, you've been around long enough that you should know better than to be cross-posting like you did. -- Steven Steven, He was not cross posting. His reference to python dicts is a result of the nested scope of my references to Xah. Making them perfectly and completely valid in this thread, and the scope therein! I do not believe a linear conversation would do anybody any good here and even valid. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 10:35:54 -0800, r wrote: the use of end in a language as high level as Ruby is redundant, and idiotic. There are a few things about Ruby i really like, but this end business is blasphemy. Blasphemy? You really are an idiot. Programming languages are not religions. Step away from the computer, and don't come back until you've grown up. And stop cross-posting, you rude little delinquent. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:13:19 -0800, Fuzzyman wrote: Care to save me the effort of looking it up and tell me what Data.Map does that Python's dict doesn't? I guess if it is functional then every mutation must copy and return a new data structure? (Which will be much more efficient in Haskell than in Python - Haskell can share most of the underlying data whereas Python would have to create a new dict every time. At least it only stores references.) Who says that it must create a whole new one? I could imagine that with a bit weakref code and some thought an immutable dictionary that shares data would be possible in Python too. regards, Marek -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au writes: You don't think Python's dict implementation is functional? I'm using the term functional in the sense of Chris Okasaki's book Purely Functional Data Structures. Basically a functional dictionary is an immutable dictionary that supports fast update operations by letting you quickly make a new dictionary that shares structure with the old one. For example, if d is a functional dictionary, then e = d.update((name, joe)) would be something like Python's e = d.copy() e[name] = joe except that it would not incur the overhead of copying d completely and instead would usually take O(log n) operations where n is the number of entries in d. Among other things this makes it trivial to implement rollback for dictionaries, multiple views of the same data, etc. Functional dictionaries are normally implemented using balanced tree structures such as red-black trees as their association mechanism, rather than hash tables. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Marek Kubica ma...@xivilization.net writes: I guess if it is functional then every mutation must copy and return a new data structure? Yes. (Which will be much more efficient in Haskell than in Python - Haskell can share most of the underlying data whereas Python would have to create a new dict every time. At least it only stores references.) The structure sharing is essential, but you can do it in Python, just not using Python dicts as far as I can tell. Who says that it must create a whole new one? I could imagine that with a bit weakref code and some thought an immutable dictionary that shares data would be possible in Python too. I don't see a way to do that. Suppose d and e are dicts that are supposed to share structure except d['name']='bob' and e['name']='joe'. How do weakrefs help? Functional dictionaries are usually implemented using red-black trees or AVL trees or similar data structures, rather than hash tables. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Jan 1, 7:38 pm, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au wrote: On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 10:35:54 -0800, r wrote: the use of end in a language as high level as Ruby is redundant, and idiotic. There are a few things about Ruby i really like, but this end business is blasphemy. Blasphemy? You really are an idiot. Programming languages are not religions. Step away from the computer, and don't come back until you've grown up. And stop cross-posting, you rude little delinquent. -- Steven Steven, Spare us your flamery, get on board, and be a part of the solution, and not just a constant problem to those you don't agree with. Or at least do like my friend Bruno, and send me up,up,and away to your bozo filter! Your one of the few trolls left that i have to deal with around here. And it's sad because sometimes you do offer good information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Why not Ruby?
Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. * Why Not Ruby? http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html plain text version follows: -- Why Not Ruby? Xah Lee, 2008-12-31 Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. The articles i read in detail are: * Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)�J. Gives general overview. * Brief tutorial: Ruby in Twenty Minutes http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/ * Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10. http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The Ruby in Twenty Minutes is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it because his opinions i respect. Q: Will you learn Ruby? No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study, functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby. Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant? Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript, Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than Scheme, and probably same as Javascript. I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword end to indicate code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like that. Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience? No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl, Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time (roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo- jumbo with its Python 3 brand new future.) There is absolutely nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp, Scheme lisp. Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then? Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc. Q: Do you condemn Ruby? No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them, are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See: Proliferation of Computing Languages. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Dec 31, 12:55 pm, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. Who are you? In case no one tells you, you are a cocky, egotistical windbag with opinions that border constructive but never gets there. Why would anyone care what you think? Again, who are you? Xah Lee? And? I didn't subscribe to read reviews on Ruby. And I'm pretty sure anyone that bothers to subscribe to a group about programming has the wherewithal to research a language themselves and come to their own determiniation. Also, this is a Python group and not Ruby. I knew I should have avoided this post and read the one about Nike Shoes from China. At least those bits of trolling spam don't try to mask themselves as something worthwhile. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On 31 Dic, 18:55, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. * Why Not Ruby? http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html plain text version follows: -- Why Not Ruby? Xah Lee, 2008-12-31 Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. The articles i read in detail are: * Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)�J. Gives general overview. * Brief tutorial: Ruby in Twenty Minuteshttp://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/ * Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10.http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The Ruby in Twenty Minutes is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it because his opinions i respect. Q: Will you learn Ruby? No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study, functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby. Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant? Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript, Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than Scheme, and probably same as Javascript. I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword end to indicate code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like that. Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience? No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl, Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time (roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo- jumbo with its Python 3 brand new future.) There is absolutely nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp, Scheme lisp. Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then? Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc. Q: Do you condemn Ruby? No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them, are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See: Proliferation of Computing Languages. This is not a Ruby group. I recommend you to go waste your time there. --- Giampaolo http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: This is not a Ruby group. I recommend you to go waste your time there. That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple, irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best to just filter the guy's posts. -- Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc. Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated Semi-Dedicated servers and Custom Hosting. 24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers. Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Roger a écrit : On Dec 31, 12:55 pm, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: (snip) Who are you? His name is Xah Lee, and he's a well(hem)known troll. Just ignore him. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
Xah Lee wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. * Why Not Ruby? http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html plain text version follows: -- Why Not Ruby? Xah Lee, 2008-12-31 Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. The articles i read in detail are: * Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)�J. Gives general overview. * Brief tutorial: Ruby in Twenty Minutes http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/ * Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10. http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The Ruby in Twenty Minutes is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it because his opinions i respect. Q: Will you learn Ruby? No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study, functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby. Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant? Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript, Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than Scheme, and probably same as Javascript. I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword end to indicate code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like that. Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience? No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl, Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time (roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo- jumbo with its Python 3 brand new future.) There is absolutely nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp, Scheme lisp. Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then? Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc. Q: Do you condemn Ruby? No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them, are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See: Proliferation of Computing Languages. Kenny Tilton, 2008-12-31 Q: Why not Xah's review of Ruby? Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. A. Three hours? I've had belches that lasted longer than that. Of course, a true master can tell a lot in just a few hours of coding with a new language... The articles i read in detail are: Q: Read?! A: That's what he said. hth,kzo -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
2008/12/31 Giampaolo Rodola' gne...@gmail.com: On 31 Dic, 18:55, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression [...] --- Giampaolo http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib Hey, Giampaolo: I had gone to the trouble to filter out the posts from xah lee, but you have quoted his entire message. If you would like to scold xah lee, you can do so directly without reposting to this fine newsgroup. Thank You Very Much. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why not Ruby?
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:16:41 -0500, Kenneth Tilton kentil...@gmail.com wrote: Xah Lee wrote: Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression for those interested. * Why Not Ruby? http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html plain text version follows: -- Why Not Ruby? Xah Lee, 2008-12-31 Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. The articles i read in detail are: * Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)¨J. Gives general overview. * Brief tutorial: Ruby in Twenty Minutes http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/ * Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10. http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The Ruby in Twenty Minutes is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it because his opinions i respect. Q: Will you learn Ruby? No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study, functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby. Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant? Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript, Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than Scheme, and probably same as Javascript. I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword end to indicate code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like that. Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience? No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl, Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time (roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo- jumbo with its Python 3 brand new future.) There is absolutely nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp, Scheme lisp. Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then? Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc. Q: Do you condemn Ruby? No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them, are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See: Proliferation of Computing Languages. Kenny Tilton, 2008-12-31 Q: Why not Xah's review of Ruby? Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today. A. Three hours? I've had belches that lasted longer than that. Of course, a true master can tell a lot in just a few hours of coding with a new language... The articles i read in detail are: Q: Read?! A: That's what he said. hth,kzo Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's guts out in a second. sln -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
