SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 73 of 73
  1. #51
    throw me a bone ... now bonefry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    848
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes, I have read quite a lot about both languages on the Web, and am aware of most of the differences.
    What about Speed ? Python is so slow right now. And Ruby is so much slower than Python. The Gnome project because it wants to have managed code, it's actually considering Mono or Java for their next gen version. Image that. No Python, no Perl (Parrot is far from finished), no Ruby.

  2. #52
    SitePoint Guru BerislavLopac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    830
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bonefry
    Off Topic:


    You're in luck, because JavaScript will be the first scripting language integrated in Java in the Mustang release.
    Can you give me more details on that? Some links perhaps?

  3. #53
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    138
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    75% of all developers have switched to Rails allready and we are still waiting for reports on this weekend
    You're ridiculing my argument a bit.
    I said earlier that I believe that PHP has very large lead on the competition in terms of market share, which will be so for a long time. Why? In part because of the arguments laid out in this thread in favor of PHP (easy to install, easy to start using), but also because of network effects. Webhost support, corporate support, the large percentage programmers who know PHP, etc.

    For phpCake, it won't matter how much PHP developers there are in total, it'll only matter how much developers there that
    * are 'smart' enough to go looking for a radical simplifying framework
    * take the time to learn such framework (that's a little like learning a new language)
    * have the freedom to choose which framework they use for their projects
    * somehow don't want to switch to Ruby to get Ruby on Rails.

    The question then is: Why would such a developer don't switch to Ruby, given it's language features it's very 'progressive' developer community? I think the only reason can be that he has strong ties with PHP, whatever those may be.

    I think that combination of qualities represent a smaller market then the market for Ruby on Rails.

    Luke had some very sound advice:

    Learn ruby and be done with it ... then move hosts
    phpCake will be for those of us who either can't, or don't want to.

  4. #54
    throw me a bone ... now bonefry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    848
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:

    Quote Originally Posted by BerislavLopac
    Can you give me more details on that? Some links perhaps?
    It's mozilla's implementation that will go in Java 6:
    http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/
    Details in here:
    http://java.sun.com/developer/techni...g_build39.html
    (search for the word javascript or JSR 223).
    Scripting languages can allready be built on top of Java (and there are allready many of them): http://www.robert-tolksdorf.de/vmlanguages.html
    But with JSR 223 Sun adds default specifications and by default, the JavaScript language (because it's small) and developers will be able to add scripting capabilities to their applications (VBScript like)
    Groovy will be another oficial scripting language: http://groovy.codehaus.org/ (but when it will grow up)
    Also, this might be of interest (Python in Java):http://www.jython.org/

  5. #55
    throw me a bone ... now bonefry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    848
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by meryn
    The question then is: Why would such a developer don't switch to Ruby, given it's language features it's very 'progressive' developer community? I think the only reason can be that he has strong ties with PHP, whatever those may be.
    Because the best technology doesn't always win (Eiffel comes in my mind). Because it's only the ideea that matters and the big sharks know that. Because the productivity over "doing the right thing" debate is far from new. Because in the end, only with big marketing campaigns or with huge comunities a platform can succed. And PHP and Java's comunities are quite BIG compared to Ruby. Not to mention companies that are throwing the big bucks or are supporting best of the breed open-source (see Apache Software Foundation). Because it's kind of unfair for Python that has been around from some time now, and supports the exact same principles that made Ruby famous.

    One last thing post edited: Because not everyone likes Smaltalk's dynamic principles, and not everyone is willing to sacrifice speed (when talking general-purpose)

  6. #56
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Redpath
    I might agree if you are talking about the odd component here or there, but Rails is a full stack so the point is you shouldn't need to start porting over all of your own libraries - but like I said already, there is plenty of stuff out there if you look for it.
    Specialised applications will need non-general libraries, but yes, this is not always the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Redpath
    As for not many hosts...there are hosts, and at the end of the day, you only need one reliable host right?
    You assume that I, the developer, am the only using the application and/or control where the application will be hosted. What if my application is something which is to be licensed out, like vBulletin. Obviously, a lack of hosts does not stack up well when it comes to selling my product. Assuming you can even find a good, realible host in the first place, it is always nice to have competition. PHP is widely offered (and generally, so is Perl), so there are many different hosting packages to choose from.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Redpath
    How hard should it be for an experienced programmer to pick up a language as relatively simple as Ruby?
    Hard is not the problem. Time is. No matter the simplicity of the language, to be truly effecient in the language you will have to take time to learn at least the basic in and out of the language. You will end up wasting re-writing already provided functionality of you don't, and trying to re-invent the wheel. You may be lost on a supposed bug for ages, which if you knew the language well you would know it was a quirk or 'feature'.

    Indenpendant programmers, who control the applications solely, may be able to make the switch fairly painlessly. But for others, is it such a bad thing to use a port of a great framework?

  7. #57
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    5,748
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    it's a pure OO language whose syntax allows it to look like a procedural language.
    This is why I don't like Ruby. To me, this is a serious disadvantage, for me it's the syntax that is the problem. It's disgusting

  8. #58
    SitePoint Guru 33degrees's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    707
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bonefry
    You shouldn't believe anything you read. Literals in Python are objects. Functions in Python are objects. Classes in Python are objects. You can do metaprogramming in Python. Python has very good reflection. And if OOP was added later, then certainlly they did it right. What is that OOP purity you are talking about ? What features are missing from Python that are so important ? The only advantage of Ruby are those code-blocks. And that's it.
    Did you bother reading the comparison I linked to? It's a reproduction of a post from the comp.lang.python mailing list comparing the two languages, here's the meat of it:

    Python and Ruby are both object oriented languages that provide a smooth transition from procedural to OO programming styles. [...] The two languages differ by approaching this solution from opposite directions.

    Python is a hybrid language. It has functions for procedural programming and objects for OO programming. Python bridges the two worlds by allowing functions and methods to interconvert using the explicit ``self’’ parameter of every method def. When a function is inserted into an object, the first argument automagically becomes a reference to the receiver.

    Ruby is a pure OO language that can masquerade as a procedural one. It has no functions, only method calls. In a Ruby method the receiver, also called self, is a hidden argument like ``this’’ in C++. A ``def’’ statement outside of a class definition, which is a function in Python, is actually a method call in Ruby. These ersatz functions become private methods of class Object, the root of the Ruby class hierarchy. Procedural programming is neatly solved from the other direction - everything is an object. If the user doesn’t grok objects yet, they can just pretend that ``def’’ is a function definition and still get useful work done.

    Ruby’s OO purity provides a number features that Python lacks or is still working toward: a unified type/class hierarchy, metaclasses, the ability to subclass everything, and uniform method invocation (none of this len() is a function but items() is a method rubbish). Ruby, like Smalltalk, only supports single inheritance, but it does have a very powerful mix-in concept: a class definition may include a module, which inserts that module’s methods, constants, etc. into the class.

    Ruby, again like Smalltalk, provides closures and code blocks and uses them to the same good effect. The Ruby collection classes and iterators are outstanding, much more powerful and elegant than the ad hoc solutions that Python is sprouting (lambdas and list comprehensions).
    What it boils down to is that, in Python, certain functionality can only be accessed via functions; in Ruby, there are no functions, everything is a Method call. Even operators, for the most part, are method calls. This may seem like a minor deal, but it has many subtle benefits, not the least of which is improved code clarity.

  9. #59
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Livingston
    This is why I don't like Ruby. To me, this is a serious disadvantage, for me it's the syntax that is the problem. It's disgusting
    Yes, it's just ugly! Again I found someone on my path who is having the same opinion about Ruby If I would use a other language I will use the language a friend made: www.chromesville.com (.NET) Needs even less lines, then the same code in C#.

  10. #60
    throw me a bone ... now bonefry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    848
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wdeboer
    Yes, it's just ugly! Again I found someone on my path who is having the same opinion about Ruby If I would use a other language I will use the language a friend made: www.chromesville.com (.NET) Needs even less lines, then the same code in C#.
    Nah, the best language in the world: BrainFu*k

  11. #61
    SitePoint Guru silver trophy Luke Redpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    794
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What exactly do you find so ugly about Ruby, that (seemingly) the majority of people find so elegant?

  12. #62
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Probably the Perlisms in alot of it's syntax. Many people are not fans of Perl-like syntax, for many reasons.

  13. #63
    SitePoint Guru BerislavLopac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    830
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bonefry
    What about Speed ?
    Well, I'm primarily concerned with the speed of development, not execution. Hardware is cheap these days.

  14. #64
    SitePoint Guru BerislavLopac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    830
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bonefry
    Nah, the best language in the world: BrainFu*k
    Personally, I prefer Ook!.

    Although any of these are also quite fine.

  15. #65
    SitePoint Guru BerislavLopac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    830
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Redpath
    What exactly do you find so ugly about Ruby, that (seemingly) the majority of people find so elegant?
    Looks like swearing in comics: @#$!%/&?

  16. #66
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Redpath
    What exactly do you find so ugly about Ruby, that (seemingly) the majority of people find so elegant?
    It just doesn't feel right to me, also some of the "workarounds" to make it the developer easier like 20493201_43920_201 or -.49_43. Why not just raise a ****ing compiler error, and not just ignore the _. Just ugly. Neither do I like the HERE <<< HERE tricks like in PHP and PErl (i think has it too). Ugly.

    Also something like:

    for i in 1..3
    print 'hello'.id, " "
    end

    I would expect this couldn't work... id? What's that? Not defined anywhere also . bla , thing. Ugly. Also those "shortcuts" like %w. Do we still need to pay $20/K or what? Also the difference between @ and @@ before a variable (?). Ooh wait, it seems to be a class variable. I just think the they didn't really thought about a syntax when developing this language, it looks ugly and clumsy to me. But that's MY opinion...

    It's not a language for a program who get paid per line

  17. #67
    SitePoint Guru BerislavLopac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    830
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm starting to get a bit frustrated with the currently available languages:

    - Ruby: "swearing" syntax, not enough verbose for my taste.
    - Python: "self" param in class methods, and-or... Just a few strange ideas too many for my taste.
    - PHP: overcrowded global namespace, lack of other namespaces, still incomplete OO support, useful mostly for Web development.
    - Java: OVERLY verbose for my taste; static and explicit typing.
    - C#: still limited to a single vendor.
    - Javascript: lacking a good universal implementation, still most useful in browser environment (JScript is not bad, but see C# above)
    - C++: no automated memory management, fast in execution but slow in development.
    - Perl: I don't even want to go into that...

    Why there can't be a language which:

    - has full OO support like Ruby or Javascript
    - has a clean verbose syntax like Python, but without its strange concepts
    - gives no specific significance to operators
    - is dynamically and implicitly typed like Python, Ruby or PHP
    - has a good, cross-platform implementation, which is preferrably open-source
    - has good memory management

    Can anyone think of such a language?

    Edit: Hmm... Smalltalk?

    Edit2: I gave it a little thought... And this is just an idea how a great language might look like:

    Code:
    class driver
    
        private driver_licence
    
        private known_destinations
    
        public method drive car (to) destination
            if driver knows destination or driver ask_directions driving_club to destination
                car drive to destination
            otherwise
                driver shout 'I have no idea where to go!'
    
        private method knows destination
            return if destination is in known_destinations
    
        private method ask_directions driving_club (to) destination
            if destination is driving_club give_directions to destination
                destination insert to known_destinations
                return ok
            otherwise
                return fail
    
    class car
        public method drive (to) destination
            (some code that makes it go vrooooooooom!)
    Last edited by BerislavLopac; Jul 18, 2005 at 15:56.

  18. #68
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wdeboer
    It just doesn't feel right to me, also some of the "workarounds" to make it the developer easier like 20493201_43920_201 or -.49_43.
    Why not just raise a ****ing compiler error, and not just ignore the _. Just ugly.
    Why WOULD it raise a compile error? It's a feature in the language that you MAY use, or you MAY not. I personally have never used the underscores as "markers" in my numbers, and have never had a problem. It's not as if NOT having an underscore in your numbers will cause a compile error...
    Neither do I like the HERE <<< HERE tricks like in PHP and PErl (i think has it too). Ugly.
    Heredoc syntax IS ugly. But it's also extremly useful from time to time when dealing with data that may include unescaped code. Again, just because it's there, doesn't mean you have to use it.

    Also something like:

    for i in 1..3
    print 'hello'.id, " "
    end

    I would expect this couldn't work... id? What's that? Not defined anywhere
    It's defined. Check out the definition http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes...t.html#M000961
    Since even a quoted string, is an object, as is a raw number, they inherit the methods of the Object object as well. So yes, it's defined.
    also . bla , thing. Ugly. Also those "shortcuts" like %w. Do we still need to pay $20/K or what?
    Ruby has a lot of areas where it inherited some "Perlisms", as the original language designer wanted, a better, easier perl. Rumor has it they're being removed in 2.0, as they aren't horribly useful. And I agree, they're ugly, and confusing.
    Also the difference between @ and @@ before a variable (?). Ooh wait, it seems to be a class variable. I just think the they didn't really thought about a syntax when developing this language, it looks ugly and clumsy to me. But that's MY opinion...
    I agree about the @ and @@ confusion, it is definitely less than obvious the us/intended use of each of those designators. But I would disagree about the not thinking out the syntax. I think the syntax is very well thought out, and far more compact without losing readibility. The very fact that you're able to decypher the code you've shown, proves that MOST of the simple language constructs are obvious, and easy. Of course this is no more valid than your opinion stating it's ugly, so say what you will I just know that for me, personally, I find the language FAR more appealing when working on most problems.

  19. #69
    throw me a bone ... now bonefry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    848
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BerislavLopac
    I'm starting to get a bit frustrated with the currently available languages:

    - Ruby: "swearing" syntax, not enough verbose for my taste.
    - Python: "self" param in class methods, and-or... Just a few strange ideas too many for my taste.
    - PHP: overcrowded global namespace, lack of other namespaces, still incomplete OO support, useful mostly for Web development.
    - Java: OVERLY verbose for my taste; static and explicit typing.
    - C#: still limited to a single vendor.
    - Javascript: lacking a good universal implementation, still most useful in browser environment (JScript is not bad, but see C# above)
    - C++: no automated memory management, fast in execution but slow in development.
    - Perl: I don't even want to go into that...

    Why there can't be a language which:

    - has full OO support like Ruby or Javascript
    - has a clean verbose syntax like Python, but without its strange concepts
    - gives no specific significance to operators
    - is dynamically and implicitly typed like Python, Ruby or PHP
    - has a good, cross-platform implementation, which is preferrably open-source
    - has good memory management

    Can anyone think of such a language?
    I understand you point, but dude, the thing is, ideeas about the perfect language change over time. A good language is a language that can evolve over time. Perl for example failed. And PHP is almoust there (when talking about design evolution).

    Remember: If a new language learned doesn't force you to think differently then it's not worth it.

    Here's my oppinion:
    - Ruby, you are right
    - Python is a good example of language evolution. Although it appeared in '90, now it's a full OO language with clean syntax. Also, thinking differently isn't such a bad thing (see above)
    - PHP - hope those cowboys learn from their mistakes. It's a good RAD language afterall.
    - Java - good as a general purpose language - and I might say, the best
    - C# - it will always be limited by a single vendor. Mono it's at M$ mercy.
    - JavaScript - it's not OOP, it's just OO (no classes, just prototipes)
    - C++ it's a hell. It made many programmers change their cariers. The next generation assembler.
    - Perl - me neither

  20. #70
    SitePoint Guru BerislavLopac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    830
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bonefry
    - JavaScript - it's not OOP, it's just OO (no classes, just prototipes)
    Excuse me, but you are mistaken. It's true that it has prototypes instead of classes, but prototypes are not inferior to classes in any way -- only different.

    With prototypes, you can "predesign" your objects just like with classes, while at the same time you can add properties to either individual instances or all objects of the same prototype without resorting to mixins and similar (ugly, to me) tricks.

    Apart from a few design mistakes (overloaded + operator, quirky support for newlines as code line end...), Javascript is the most elegant language I know. Read more about it on http://www.crockford.com/javascript/

  21. #71
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bonefry
    I am thinking more on commercial side of things. We all have to eat . How many projects are made in Rails ? How many people choose Rails over Java or PHP or Python or Perl (I know there are some, but not enough). Of course, it has gathered a wonderfull comunity around allready. And that's very good. And maybe in 2 years from now, Ruby will be quite attractive for business. But right now it's not. And that's imaturity (unless proven wrong a language is considered imature from the start).
    This is what I see when I try to weigh options around rails. I know that it is a great language, but unless you are creating proprietary software that you will host (like basecamp), rails just is not mainstream yet for business. Soon enough though for sure.

  22. #72
    SitePoint Wizard DougBTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Bath, UK
    Posts
    2,498
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by acidbox
    This is what I see when I try to weigh options around rails. I know that it is a great language, but unless you are creating proprietary software that you will host (like basecamp), rails just is not mainstream yet for business. Soon enough though for sure.
    Well, you can rationalise and say that if everyone is hitting their collective heads against a brick wall, everyone will have a sore head, so on average you'll be fine.

    Though don't complain if you still have a sore head.
    Hello World

  23. #73
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    utah
    Posts
    11
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sweatje
    Stumpled across PHP on Trax, which also proports to be a rails port.
    Much more closely than all others to my knowledge. If you know rails, you pretty much will know trax. They originally called it PHP on Rails, but the top dog at ROR called them up and asked them to change it.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •