bonefry you sure throw a lot of opinion around, but you always forget  
to qualify it as such.  :(

On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:06 AM, bonefry wrote:

> Debugers are indeed overrated, but that doesn't mean they aren't
> usefull. How can a unit test show you why the exit point of your
> recursive function is not reached for example ?

No problem here, since Ruby ships with a debugger.

> Emacs/VI are good but they have an almoust vertical learning curve.
> Notepad, I don't think so. And I really miss features of Eclipse  
> like a
> good file browser, jumping to the class/method declaration, a class
> hierarchy viewer, code checking while typing, and all those  
> refactoring
> and code generation tools.

You list four text editors/IDEs here, so I hardly think that's  
representative.  I can name at least twice as many more that I know  
are Ruby aware.

And doesn't Eclipse have a Ruby plug-in?

> Unfortunatelly, without a faster VM, we won't have those libraries too
> soon. Because if they are done in pure Ruby they might get too slow,

You are totally using guesswork here and it's poorly researched guess  
work at that.

> and if they are done in C, the programmers working on them have to be
> proeficient with 2 languages. Before having all kinds of usefull
> libraries, in my oppinion, the VM's speed should increase.

Many people know C, so there's not much of a leap here.  The entire  
Core Ruby team, just to name one example, fits your profile perfectly.

> And Ruby currently chokes on O(n).

Oh please!  That's not even intelligent enough to provoke a comment.   
Now you are simply ignoring reality.

James Edward Gray II