[Unicode]
> I need it.

I keep on reading people that need Unicode, and in your case it may very 
well be true and for many others as well.

But personally I never had a need to use Unicode and it may be true for 
many others as well.

======================================================

But about the blogger in question - it is easy to see he is an avid 
python user.
Personally I have no big objection to python as a language (much less 
than against perl or php), I think projects using python instead of perl 
do a big improvement in general for various reasons, and I think anyone 
choosing python can as well choose ruby.

But the blogger seems to make extremely BAD points:

Point 1
"The language and its implementation are incomplete and immature."
"A project loses time when it must implement missing or incomplete 
functionality."

This is a statement. He does not give points to illustrate this 
statement.
I can only laugh about unbased statements. What functionality is 
missing?
Should viewers try to understand how you think?

Point 2
"The language is inconsistent and needlessly complex. Inconsistency and 
complexity confuses people and confusion breeds bugs."

It is true that ruby as a whole is a _complex_ language. So is haskell.
"Complexity" alone is nothing inherently bad. If you want an euphemism 
for "complexity", you could use "powerful". And if we use the word 
powerful the
language suddenly no longer appears "bad". But it is true - ruby is 
complex. There is a lot to learn and know for a newcomer to ruby 
(normally, but ruby is A LOT easier than haskell)

When i went from php (yes, laugh...) to ruby there was a lot to learn. 
There is still a lot to learn but the situation has changed. I have 
since then entirely got rid of all my php (which means yes, all my web 
stuff is powered by ruby).

For several reasons, ruby is a much better language than php. And ruby 
is more suited to outside-www tasks than php ever will.

Ruby as a language is not inconsistent though.

As said I partially agree about the complexity stuff as in "a lot to 
learn and know", but this does not really matter for a given project. 
For example I do spend more time aggressively thinking if I really need 
to use something in a ruby program or not.
@@class_vars I really never need, global vars I do sometimes use but 
they arent needed that much. Metamagic is sometimes fun but I dont think 
there are that many use cases for it. (I am just in love of objects 
which seem to solve pretty everything ...)

Point 3
"The documentation is incomplete. Incomplete documentation breeds bugs 
as you might misuse a feature."

That documentation could be improved in ruby - agreed. I am in total 
favour of this, and I hope people do not recommend _only_ ri as 
"solution". Often the ri was equivalent to "RTFM". This is what php for 
a long time had better solved than ruby due to webpages _about_ php and 
the php-homepage docu (the situation has changed in the recent years for 
ruby due to some websites and efforts improving online docu of ruby, so 
I am not complaining here really)

That "incomplete docu breeds bugs" is total and utter bullshit.


Last but not least, I think everyone that visits the blog knows what
"Comments are closed." means:
  He is only interested in presenting his (IMHO incorrect) view to the 
visitor.

A blog that disallows comments yet makes many unfound and incorrect 
statements is just wasting time of the visitor.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.