Tony Arcieri wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Brian Wolf <brw314 / gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> As an example, Twitter was founded on Ruby, however has found not to be
>> sufficiently scalable.
>>
> 
> I think the problems that lead Twitter to move their backend to Scala 
> are
> more architectural than they are issues with Ruby as a language.

My point exactly.  And to the OP's question:

I use Ruby because it's better designed than virtually any other 
language in common use.  It's object-oriented from the ground up (unlike 
Java or C++), with a healthy dose of functional programming thrown in. 
This combination is extremely powerful and expressive -- not to mention 
exhilarating.  With Ruby, I can develop better code faster than other 
languages, and have more fun doing it.  It is my language of choice for 
applications programming.

Why not Ruby?  Unless you're doing low-level systems programming or 
certain real-time applications, I can't think of a good reason.  And 
even in those domains, Ruby might be a good choice as a wrapper around C 
or something...

Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen / marnen.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.