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/.