Larz wrote:

>> Your entire response is based on your own opinions.  I don't recall
>> care if people like is dislike any certain language, but just like
>> saying people in other languages claim ruby is all hype, there are
>> those that buy into the claim that languages like Perl are fading
>> away -- especially when you say things like "I would never want to
>> work at a
>> company that wanted to develop some new app in perl."  That's
>> preposterous.  You can replace Perl in that sentence with PHP, C,
>> C++,
>> Python, Java, etc.  It's all personal view.
> 
>  It's my opinion when I am an employee, when management makes a
> decision, then it's not just an opinion, it's what you get stuck
> with.

You said you wouldn't want to work with a company that developed new
applications in Perl.  That has nothing to do with management, it has
to do with your opinion about Perl.  That's fine, but you used it as a
basis to say Perl was old technology.

>>
>> In fact, one could say the same thing about another language and use
>> "ruby" in the example of "never wanting to work at a company that
>> uses
>> ruby".  The passion, ignorance and arrogance regarding "language
>> wars"
>> goes both ways.  It's pretty short sighted to call Perl "old
>> technology" because you happen to like Ruby more.  I don't know why
>> people can't be more reasonable and less biased.  I prefer Perl, but
>> I'm not here talking badly about ruby -- I'm here because I use it,
>> too.  Therefore, there's no reason to get defensive or think you need
>> to slam another language.  Perl is hardly old, just because it's
>> older. Ruby has been around for a very long time as well, so I guess
>> by your logic, it's technically ran its course, too?
> 
>  It's only old because object oriented programming is an important
> modern paradigm.

OO existed before Perl, before PHP, before Python, Java, Ruby, etc.  Not
everything needs to be OO to be modern or worth using.

> I look it maybe like archery is old, guns are newer. 

That's a poor analogy.

> That maybe not a good example because I like archery, but in a real
> war you'd have to go with a gun.

Then we're talking about different gun brands.  They all shoot.

> OO enables you to write larger apps 
> that fit together more easily if you design the app correctly.

And if you design correctly, it doesn't have to be OO to fit together
easily.  Of course, I'm not debating the merits of OO.  I even said if
you want OO, ruby is a better choice than Perl.  So, what's the
argument about?

> Some 
> languages are older in that sense, but maybe it's not worth arguing
> about as if you are a programmer you might be biased and many people
> are ..

Everyone's "biased" to their own opinions.  You're biased about yours. 
I'm actually not being biased.  Factually, ruby is better for OO.  You
act like Perl is old news.  It's always being developed.  I'm not
trying to sell you on it, I don't care, but it's a falsehood to claim
it's some old technology that's a mistake to code in.  That's
ridiculous.  To you, it's not a good fit, that's fine.  Why not just
say that, instead of acting like your view is absolute?
 
> 
> 
>> Seriously, who cares?  No one said the OP should learn Perl instead
>> of ruby, and of course there will be support and bias toward ruby,
>> since
>> this is a ruby group.  It's all about choice and preference.  If you
>> want to get down to the base of the debate that appears to have
>> evolved from the question (big surprise there), then people shouldn't
>> be encouraged to use a different language just because someone else
>> finds it interesting, or because it is newer (that doesn't make it
>> better). That's usually the reason why, and people shouldn't drop the
>> idea of developing a project in languages they know well, just to
>> code in a
>> newer language someone else is excited about.  The project should be
>> coded the most efficient, secure and stable as possible, which means
>> sticking to what you know.  If you know ruby better, use ruby.  If
>> you
>> have the time and find ruby interesting, learn it anyway.  It never
>> hurts to get good at something you might not be good at now (in which
>> case a lot of people could actually benefit from learning Perl, or
>> PHP, or Java, if they know ruby and have the desire and motivation to
>> learn something else).
> 
> I can't argue with that except everyone may have their own agenda.

They may, and may not.

> You 
> might find it frustrating to learn something newer,

No, I don't.

> but it's not just 
> newer in that it was just invented, presumably languages are
> advancing ..

And Perl 6 is being developed as we speak.  Ruby is also being
developed.  They are both alive.

 
> 
>> As for legacy code, there are a lot of languages that have legacy
>> code,
>> some not very good -- and that includes ruby.  Some people can code
>> well and some can not.  Some people abandon code and some do not.  I
>> really fail to see how one has to do with another.  If you like heavy
>> OO type programming languages, then yeah, ruby would probably suit
>> you
>> better than Perl or PHP.  If you don't agree or don't care, then
>> there are a lot of other languages that work equally as well, which
>> aren't
>> going anywhere.  In closing, check the statistics and there are a lot
>> more larger sites that most people online use daily that are
>> developed in Perl (yes, new code developed today and more yesterday),
>> being so much for your theory that you'd not work for any company
>> that developed
>> new applications in Perl.  You may as well denounce any new
>> applications coded in Python, PHP, C, C++, Java, too.
> 
>  C, C++ are well suited for embedded and compiled apps, Java has it's
> place as well.

As ruby has its place, as PHP as its place, as Python has its place.
 
>> I get it, you
>> like ruby, you don't care for Perl, that's fine with me, but keep the
>> claims on level and fair.  There's no anti-ruby witch hunting in this
>> thread, so practice what you preach.  Since no one's coming up with
>> untrue reasons why ruby isn't for them, why state your opinion about
>> Perl as being factual?  Don't be so closed minded that you trash talk
>> languages you don't agree with, because it makes you no better than
>> the
>> Perl programmers you mention whom unfairly trash talk ruby.  They are
>> both good languages and neither are going anywhere.
> 
>  There are no doubt some highly talented and smart people that use
> Perl, it's not that perl is irrelevant, I didn't say that. Ruby will
> someday peak out as well ..

Okay, fair enough.  I got the impression you were making a claim that
Perl is on a definite and indefinite downturn, as if it as some old
archaic language that people shouldn't waste time with, and should
instead use ruby.  I apologize if I misunderstood your intent or
meaning.
-- 
Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc.
Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated & Semi-Dedicated servers
and Custom Hosting.  24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers.
Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle!