On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:47:57AM +0900, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> >  
> No ... I don't have to unlearn the parts of Perl that are common to 
> Ruby. I do have to unlearn putting semicolons at the end of every 
> statement, using curly braces for blocks, using tabs for indentation 
> instead of spaces, and starting an ordinary scalar working variable with 
> a dollar sign. I have to unlearn taking a string like "3.56" to an 
> integer power and getting a double precision value back. I have to 
> unlearn "$a{'Sep'} = 3;" and replace it with "a['Sep'] = 3", etc.

Why?  Why not just remember that it's a separate language?  I've
experienced a little negative transferrence of knowledge between Ruby
and Perl because of their similarities, but once I got past that minor
hurdle my growing knowledge in each language has only helped with my
ability to learn more about the other.  If you aren't doing the same,
you're doing something wrong.


> Chad Perrin wrote:
> >I don't see that happening.  I see Rails getting a lot of attention, and
> >many people being attracted first to it then, by way of Rails, to Ruby
> >in general.  Ultimately, people seem to be getting enamored with the
> >language, with Rails as merely the "gateway drug".  The number of people
> >I've run across who do one project in Rails, then go on to use Ruby
> >without ever touching Rails again, outnumbers the people who come to
> >Rails and don't continue to use Ruby for anything else.

[ snip ]

> 
> Now I think I could do that; I'm just waiting for an excuse to build a 
> web app. Meanwhile, I'm building something else, and I'm building it in 
> pure Ruby. And I'm doing it in pure Ruby against the advice of folks who 
> think I should drop into C for the number crunching or use an existing 
> number crunching library written in C.

Thanks for making my point for me.


> >  
> Well ... some of the Java applications I like are "Compendium", 
> "DBDesigner4", Protege, the PEPA Workbench, the GUI wrapper on PRISM, 
> and a couple of audio applications I haven't used in a while. In those 
> cases, I think Java was chosen for its portability and for its 
> convenient GUI. It's really being used as a "scripting language" in the 
> case of PRISM ... the underlying application is in C for speed. The PEPA 
> Workbench was originally written in ML, but I don't think the ML version 
> had a GUI. All the rest are "pure Java".
> 
> They're all GUI applications, and I suspect the only alternative to Java 
> would have been Tcl/Tk (or some other language with a Tk GUI) at the 
> time these applications were conceived. There are more choices now -- 
> everybody has a Tk GUI, nearly everybody has a GTK, QT, Fox, and wx GUI 
> toolkit, and nearly everybody can do all this on Windows, Linux, Mac and 
> Solaris. Does Java still run on a Mac?

Yeah, you can still run Java on a Mac.  Of course, for the purposes you
describe, I suspect Smalltalk would have been a better choice for those
applications in most cases.  Smalltalk is underrated and marginalized to
the point that almost nobody thinks of it when choosing a language for a
project, though, unfortunately.


> Chad Perrin wrote:
> >Yeah, even macro assembler.  I'll leave that work for someone else, for
> >the time being: it's not my cup of tea.
> >  
> The macro assembler programmers I know drink coffee ... a lot of coffee. 
> :) Do Ruby programmers drink Ruby Mist?

I'll let you know when I'm a "Ruby programmer", I guess.  I'm just a
Ruby hobbyist for the most part, right now.  In fact, I'm really kind of
a Perl and PHP programmer, and a lots-of-other-languages hobbyist.  I
also get paid more for my english writing than my Perl, PHP, Ruby, et
cetera, writing -- so I guess I'm an English programmer, in a sense.

Hey, whatever pays the bills.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
print substr("Just another Perl hacker", 0, -2);