FYI: Ruby 1.6.0 - An object-oriented language for quick and easy programming
I don't like OOP, you folks obviously do. Maybe docs/specs/... are interesting for you ... Have fun. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: fm.announce Subject: Ruby 1.6.0 - An object-oriented language for quick and easy programming Date: 19 Sep 2000 09:58:15 GMT application: Ruby 1.6.0 author: Yukihiro Matsumoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] license: GPL category: Development/Languages urgency: medium homepage: http://freshmeat.net/redir/homepage/915828413/ download: http://freshmeat.net/redir/download/915828413/ description: Ruby is a language for quick and easy programming. Similar in scope to Perl and Python, it has high-level data types, automatic memory management, dynamic typing, a module system, exceptions, and a rich standard library. What sets Ruby apart is a clean and consistent language design where everything is an object. Other distinguishing features are CLU-style iterators for loop abstraction, singleton classes/methods and lexical closures. Changes: A major release. Numerous bugfixes have been added. | http://freshmeat.net/news/2000/09/19/969357725.html -- H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://www.amsterdam.pm.org/) using perl-5.005.03, 5.6.0, 5.7.1 516 on HP-UX 10.20 11.00, AIX 4.2 4.3, DEC OSF/1 4.0 and WinNT 4.0 SP-6a, often with Tk800.022 and/or DBD-Unify ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/languages/perl/CPAN/authors/id/H/HM/HMBRAND/
Re: FYI: Ruby 1.6.0 - An object-oriented language for quick and easy programming
What sets Ruby apart is a clean and consistent language design where everything is an object. I like this part. Assuming I ever finish my last RFC I'd like Perl to have embedded objects as well. The difference being Perl's wouldn't get in the way, unlike Python's. Of particular interest seems to be this link: http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/compar.html Which has a somewhat poignant analysis of Perl's OO: Ruby was a genuine easy-to-use object-oriented language from the beginning; whereas Perl's OOP features were added to non-OO Perl, so that these features are (unlike the rest of Perl) very clumsy and hard to use correctly and effectively. For many people and purposes, Ruby is a better OO Perl than Perl. And then there's the lexical variable issue too: The default variable scope rules for Ruby (default: local) are much better suited for medium-to-large scale programming tasks; no "my, my, my" proliferation is needed for safe Ruby programming Food for though at least. -Nate
Re: FYI: Ruby 1.6.0 - An object-oriented language for quick and easy programming
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 08:07:33AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote: On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote: And then there's the lexical variable issue too: The default variable scope rules for Ruby (default: local) are much better suited for medium-to-large scale programming tasks; no "my, my, my" proliferation is needed for safe Ruby programming Actually, this is the bit that interests me. Most times, when you create a variable, you *do* want local scope. Really? You want a brand new $foo inside a while loop, distinct from the one inside the surrounding sub? That is lost when the while loop terminates? I think I would be guardedly in favor of changing the default scope from global to local (although I have the feeling there is something I'm not considering). What does everyone else think? Sounds like a really bad idea. That's one of the reasons why people tend to hate tcl: everything is 'upvar' this and 'upvar' that to go up one level of scope. Z.
