Hal Fulton <hal9000 / hypermetrics.com> wrote: > In fact, I am not opposed to learning both. At the moment > I haven't time, but later maybe I will. It's a language, not > a religion. I'm tried both as well. In fact, I was directed to ruby by a poster on c.l.py... > His use of "hyperenthusiast" is interesting. Does it apply > only to non-Python people? He probably means "fanboy", but was put off by Python's "one and only one reasonable way" of doing things. :) > As for the "Ruby has better OO" argument -- Pythonists call it > FUD, but it appears simple common sense (from what Python I've > seen). But I think a large part of that is that Ruby and > Python are evolutionarily different. I've heard -- this may > be wrong -- that Python's OO descends from Modula-3 or some > such. I can't comment. I do know that it seems less OO than > Ruby to me (or Java, C++, Object Pascal). I'm tempted to join in the "Python OO is weak" chant. But your last point, that they are simply different approaches, is valid, and I shall refrain... for now. > As for significant whitespace -- surely it's a matter of > opinion whether this is the "right" way or not. One can make > arguments in both directions. I was initially drawn to the > idea, but after playing with it, I found it had its drawbacks. There are two things that I think python got absolutely *right*: One is Python's ternary expressions ("if 0 < x < 10:"), which have functional equivalents in Ruby. The other is significant whitespace. I think this has to do with the fact that Python, being derived from an educational language, imposes educational practices on its code; it's also quite possible that if modern educational languages focused more on actually teaching good practices and style, and less on making sure they use the latest GUI toolkit endorsed by Microsoft/Sun, I wouldn't have such a strong opinion on the matter. > Most (human) languages are written left to right. Are Arabic > and Hebrew "wrong" because they aren't? puts "#$your_way sucks" unless $your_way.equal?( $my_way ) # :) That said, I've been a Ruby hobbyist for about 4 or 5 years now, and I had no idea what "Rails" was until recently. I knew that traffic in c.l.r had more than tripled in recent months, and that instead of the normal Ruby idiom/syntax/language questions, I started seeing a lot of configuration questions about some application framework apparently based on ruby. I'm glad ruby is getting the attention I believe it deserves. And I've seen some exciting things happen in the core language. But Rails is a framework. Ruby is a language. Many dozens of developers churn out Rails applications without ever really knowing much more than tutorial-level Ruby. And as a web development framework, it can't escape being a fad. Some fads fade into obscurity (ASP, HTML::Mason, or *gasp* Zope), and some fade into oblivion (ColdFusion). Even PHP's seeming Golden Age will eventually pass, and either pass its torch, or burn out. I've played with Rails, and find it fascinating. And hopefully it will grow and evolve and influence technology, and we will learn and benefit, but it will fade. I only hope Ruby doesn't invest all of itself in this trend and fade with it. You could all spend another 20-30 post thread psychoanalyzing my article and extrapolating information about how I was abused by Zope as a child, or we could get back to what brought us here originally, which is having fun with a great language and the great tools it brings with it. </rant> My USD$0.05, Tim Hammerquist