Paul Brannan wrote:

>On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:46:30AM +0900, Peter I. Hansen wrote:
>
>>I just read this document, and I think time is spent better reading 
>>tutorials for the respective languages.
>>
>>It starts out very biased towards Ruby. Then Ruby is almost declared 
>>non-OO because you can't do "string".print ...
>>This is not how I wan't an OO language to behave (Just as I don't x.sin 
>>instead of sin(x) ).
>>
>
>What's worse is that the document seeks to discover which is the
>"better" of the two languages, often using terms like "the winner" for a
>particular category.  This is not appopriate for a comparison of two
>languages.
>
>I am not a Python expert, though I do have some experience writing
>Python code.  When I first started with Python, I tried writing Python
>code the way I would write Ruby code.  This turned out to be a futile
>attempt, since Python has a very different philosophy from Ruby.  Things
>that I might do one way in Ruby are done completely differently in
>Python.  Both languages are very powerful and complex, and a 16-page
>comparison is not going to do justice to either language.
>
>Paul
>
I agree, its a very poorly written comparison.

/Peter