What is Ruby, and why should I care?

[polvero]

it's funny how something like ruby comes out and gets every php developer worried...
question: since I wasn't around for the big transition from Perl (to ASP) to PHP, what was the transition like during that era? Were people as worried as they were now?

[KTottE]

Jesus, this thread is a prime example in why everybody should study english in school.

Poster A: "Foobar has properties X, Y and Z."
Poster B: "OMG, Foobar is a lot more than Z! It does X and Y too!"
Poster A: "That's what I said: Foobar has properties X, Y and Z."
Poster B: "Stop saying Foobar only has property Z! IT DOES X AND Y TOO!!"

The reason behind the Holy War(tm) between Ruby/Ruby on Rails and PHP is that people don't understand the differences and similarities.

Ruby vs. PHP is like Vi vs. Emacs, K&R indenting vs. BSD/Allman indenting: The answer is: Use what you feel comfortable using. The difference between Ruby and PHP are in the design and philosophy of the language, nothing more.

All the things you can accomplish in Ruby you can accomplish in PHP too. All the things you can accomplish in PHP you can accomplish in Ruby too.
Now people will go "But I can do Foo in only 5 lines of Ruby code, but it takes me at least 15 lines of PHP code to do the same!" and I'm telling you: So what?
If Foo is easier/faster to do in Ruby, then Bar is easier/faster to do in PHP.

Now, if you want to talk about Ruby on Rails vs PHP, then it's a whole other issue. PHP is a language, Ruby on Rails is a framework. You can't compare them. It's like trying to compare your car with the road it runs on. Comparing the shows on TV with the TV they are displayed on ("Well, the Brady Bunch is so much better on my Panasonic TV than on your Sony TV").

It doesn't work.

So, could we please dispense with all the bull**** arguments of Ruby/Ruby on Rails vs. Arbitrary Other Language?

[ghurtado]

it's funny how something like ruby comes out and gets every php developer worried...

I am a PHP developer and I am not worried, I welcome new programming options.

question: since I wasn't around for the big transition from Perl (to ASP) to PHP, what was the transition like during that era? Were people as worried as they were now?

There are a lot of problems with this statement. First of all there was never a "transition" from Perl to PHP. There are still thousands of developers out there who use Perl on a regular basis for a number of purposes where Perl is the "de facto" language. A lot of that usage may never change.

If there never was a transition from Perl to PHP, then there definetly wasn't one to or from ASP, I have no idea where you get this impression. I was around and programming Perl at the time (if you are referring to about 6-7 years ago) and I definitely didn't go from Perl to ASP to PHP.

Now I am considering Ruby as a language that teaches me new approaches to application design, but the language itself is just a tool, not an end in itself. That doesn't mean that I am "Transitioning" to anything. Just like when I first strated learning English (my second language) I didn't begin the proccess of "unlearning" my native tongue

[asp_funda]

"Well, the Brady Bunch is so much better on my Panasonic TV than on your Sony TV"

well said!!

[Dangermouse]

This is getting like slashdot. Posting 'articles' (highlighting discussions) which they know will spark a 'debate'.

[Carl]

Just like when I first strated learning English (my second language) I didn't begin the proccess of "unlearning" my native tongue

This is good. When I had to learn swedish I did not start in by saying it would replace my english. When someone calls me at home and speaks english I don't answer them in Swedish and tell them how much better it is than English. I use the language that is best for the situation at hand. I don't discriminate either. I work partime at a restaurant where the owners speak Turkish I find myself curious and started trying to understand a bit of the language.

Now we come to a biggie. I have found that to get better at doing PHP that I need to learn German because the enthusiasm by German enterprise for PHP is enormous much more than Swedish companies and probably American enterprise. I could very well learn German speak it everyday for the rest of my life and be quite happy making a living from having switched from English. But I won't do that because the language is only a tool to be used as needed.

[Skyblaze]

it's funny how something like ruby comes out and gets every php developer worried...
question: since I wasn't around for the big transition from Perl (to ASP) to PHP, what was the transition like during that era? Were people as worried as they were now?

so, after reading the last posts we know that nobody will switch to ruby only from php. So don't worry you.

[bonefry]

Now, if you want to talk about Ruby on Rails vs PHP, then it's a whole other issue. PHP is a language, Ruby on Rails is a framework. You can't compare them. It's like trying to compare your car with the road it runs on. Comparing the shows on TV with the TV they are displayed on ("Well, the Brady Bunch is so much better on my Panasonic TV than on your Sony TV").

Well let me give it a try. Biggest problem with PHP is that it doesn't have a killer framework like Rails. I mean, even Python has Zope (and Django might proove to be another). PHP has managed to go without a killer framework which is quite admirable, but when people wake up realising they want more, they ussualy hit a wall.

[KTottE]

Google tells me otherwise, in fact it tells me it found 9,020,000 results.

For Ruby, it found only 1,820,000. Python comes in a little better at 2,770,000 results.

The outdated, "nobody uses it anymore" Perl has almost the same amount of results as Ruby and Python put together at 4,140,000.

And ASP, that PHP apparently was designed to replace if you read this thread (incorrect, by the way), beats them all out at a whopping 13,400,000 results.

Lets remove 99% of the results and count 'em as results referring to actual frameworks, the numbers for existing frameworks for the languages come in at:
ASP 134 000
PHP 90 200
Perl 41 400
Python 27 700
Ruby 18 200

These numbers are of course completely bogus and highly unscientific, but it does prove that if you want a web application framework there are options out there, regardless of which language you are using.

Which one is best, easiest, most powerful, scales the best, looks best in a bathing suit doesn't really matter. It's another one of the vi vs. emacs discussions I mentioned in my previous post, and it's utterly pointless to discuss as it does not matter.

[worchyld]

I certainly didn't expect this thread to run for 5 pages.

If I get time I'll certainly try to learn some basic Ruby - just to see what it does, but I'll probably won't move on from the command prompt.

I'll try to learn a little .NET too, but I'm not really a fan on .NET because you have to use IIS and Microsoft Access.

Regardless, I'll certainly try Ruby/.NET, but it all depends on time.

Many thanks.

[bonefry]

Google tells me otherwise, in fact it tells me it found 9,020,000 results.

For Ruby, it found only 1,820,000. Python comes in a little better at 2,770,000 results.
...
These numbers are of course completely bogus and highly unscientific, but it does prove that if you want a web application framework there are options out there, regardless of which language you are using.

No, it doesn't proove a thing, and actually it's a pretty lame argument.
I know the options out there for PHP. The only interesting frameworks have ideeas taken from Java. There is no PHPic way.
Give me one good PHP framework example.

[Luke Redpath]

Google tells me otherwise, in fact it tells me it found 9,020,000 results.

For Ruby, it found only 1,820,000. Python comes in a little better at 2,770,000 results.

The outdated, "nobody uses it anymore" Perl has almost the same amount of results as Ruby and Python put together at 4,140,000.

And ASP, that PHP apparently was designed to replace if you read this thread (incorrect, by the way), beats them all out at a whopping 13,400,000 results.

Lets remove 99% of the results and count 'em as results referring to actual frameworks, the numbers for existing frameworks for the languages come in at:
ASP 134 000
PHP 90 200
Perl 41 400
Python 27 700
Ruby 18 200

These numbers are of course completely bogus and highly unscientific, but it does prove that if you want a web application framework there are options out there, regardless of which language you are using.
google.com/search?q=Ruby+Web+Application+Framework]Ruby[/url], it found only 1,820,000. Python comes in a little better at 2,770,000 results.

The outdated, "nobody uses it anymore" Perl has almost the same amount of results as Ruby and Python put together at 4,140,000.

And ASP, that PHP apparently was designed to replace if you read this thread (incorrect, by the way), beats them all out at a whopping 13,400,000 results.

Lets remove 99% of the results and count 'em as results referring to actual frameworks, the numbers for existing frameworks for the languages come in at:
ASP 134 000
PHP 90 200
Perl 41 400
Python 27 700
Ruby 18 200

Which one is best, easiest, most powerful, scales the best, looks best in a bathing suit doesn't really matter. It's another one of the vi vs. emacs discussions I mentioned in my previous post, and it's utterly pointless to discuss as it does not matter.

This thread is full of people missing the point. There are LOADS of PHP frameworks. The point is that not one of them has proved to be a "killer" framework that has gained anywhere near as much traction as Rails has. The fact that Rails has gained so much popularity so quickly even though its written in an language foreign to so many people, and that it is attracting users from all over the PHP/.NET/Java landscape, and these people are staying, and learning Ruby, and enjoying it, is testament to just how useful Rails is. You don't see a mass exodus of programmers to a particular PHP framework now do you?

Like you said, your google results are utterly worthless and prove nothing whatsoever.

I could just as easily point out that a google search "web development framework" on Google brings back RubyOnRails as its number 1 result. Now what does that tell you? In fact, in the first 50 results, there are only 2 or 3 links to anything PHP/framework related. Everything else is .NET/Java.

[Etnu]

I think there is a point that everyone may be beating around with the amateur/professional arguments.

I would say it is PHP's ability to be either procedural or OO which is a high point of the low barrier to entry, I assert that most hobbyists start using PHP from a purely procedural approach. OOP is a conceptual hurdle, which many users both professional and amateur make use of, but is in greater demand by the professional element. Ruby can be used in a procedural manner, similar to PHP, but to use Rails, you are introduced into Ruby's OOP model up front and personal. The fact that you must engage in OOP programming immediately may be a reason some posters feel Rails will have less appeal to an amateur audience.

$0.02 pitched into the fray.

Eh, that's really entirely subjective. Most people get their first programming exposure to VB or Java, and, well, both languages are highly OO.

Please, let me know how one would use Ruby without using it's OOP nature? It is quite literally impossible to use Ruby without using OO since everything is an object.

Everything in javascript is an object, too, but that doesn't mean that people aren't writing procedural javascript code.

it's funny how something like ruby comes out and gets every php developer worried...
question: since I wasn't around for the big transition from Perl (to ASP) to PHP, what was the transition like during that era? Were people as worried as they were now?

The only people that "worry" when a new language comes out are those who are not talented enough to adapt quickly (and by "quickly", I mean the 5-10 years that it takes before a laguage shifts to being dominant).

By the way, I still see thousands upon thousands of people using ASP, and I've yet to encounter a single unix-based web server that didn't have perl scripts running on it.

Well let me give it a try. Biggest problem with PHP is that it doesn't have a killer framework like Rails. I mean, even Python has Zope (and Django might proove to be another). PHP has managed to go without a killer framework which is quite admirable, but when people wake up realising they want more, they ussualy hit a wall.

This ultimately begs the question: if there isn't one after all this time, is there really a NEED for one?

I've seen plenty of very large PHP projects in my time, and they seem to get by without using a 3rd party framework, have similiar or smaller size teams than projects done in Java and ASP, and release just as often (or more frequently).

Remember, in programming, as in any other science or art, there is no set formula, medium, or mode of thinking that will always hold true. Ideas change, people change, and languages change. Architectures change.

If you really want to, you can just blindly trudge along and follow the 'best practices' and how to's from others. You can certainly make a career out of this, and I wouldn't begrudge anyone who likes working in a factory from doing so. If you're actually a fan of being on the cutting edge, being the leader rather than the follower -- being the person coming up with the ideas rather than the person implementing them -- then stop worrying about languages so much!

Most programmers that I come across fail to recognize that what they're doing is merely a tool to achieve a job. Spending all your time focusing on a specific way of doing something may sound like a great way to work right now, but in the long run you'll be far behind and wondering how you got so far out of touch 10 or 20 years from now. It's the holding back and sticking with stuff "because it works well enough for me" is exactly what hurts technology growth. How on earth can you possibly know if something is good enough if you haven't even tried the other things? That's silly.

Many people using AOL think the connection is "good enough", because they don't even realize how much more they can get done with a faster connection. They don't even realize how many hours of their lives are wasted just waiting for files to download.

[Luke Redpath]

This ultimately begs the question: if there isn't one after all this time, is there really a NEED for one?

I think the continuing success of Rails, and many a Java framework, not to mention .NET, proves there is certainly a need for a framework. So why should PHP be any different? Well, it all depends on what you are using PHP for. But if you are using PHP professionally to build web applications, and not just simple websites, then I think the need for a framework becomes more and more apparent, whether you write your own or use one off the shelf.

Now, you don't need a framework in as much as its possible to write a web app without one...but they can make your life much easier.

[Luke Redpath]

Now, a question to everybody questioning the need for Ruby and/or Rails. Have you even used Rails? If not, its very difficult to question why somebody who does use Rails likes it as much as they do.

If you do not want to bother learning something different, then fine, why hang around here trying to be argumentative?

If you give Rails a go then find you still don't like it, I'm sure you'll have something a bit more constructive to say. But at least try the damn thing.

[KTottE]

bonefry: How does it not prove a thing? Out of nine million results, I'll bet you at least ten will point you to good web application frameworks for/in PHP.
You said there was no "killer framework" for PHP, and I think you need to define what a "killer" framework is before you make statements like that.

Is there a Rails-clone in PHP (like Django is for Python)? Probably not. Does that matter? Not in the slightest.

Luke Redpath: one of the reasons that Rails is gaining a massive amount of traction as you put it is the massive amount of hype surrounding it. The people behind Rails are pushing it as the New Best Thing, and with Ruby being a fairly anonymous language compared to PHP they also add the hype of Ruby to the mix with it's OO capabilities and whatnot.

The different web application frameworks for PHP are obviously not pushing their product as hard as the Rails team are, and since PHP is "old news" compared to Ruby not as many people jump on the bandwagon.

Is there a Killer Framework for PHP? Most likely. Is there a Rails-clone? Probably not.

Are either of you using Rails in a production environment?

[Luke Redpath]

Is there a Killer Framework for PHP? Most likely

No. I say this as somebody who used PHP for several years and spent ages looking for one. If there IS one, its very well hidden.

Are there Rails clones for PHP? A few. But none will be able to match the elegance of Rails because PHP will never be able to match Ruby's power of reflection and meta-programming abilities. Rails reads like a DSL as much as being a framework. Things that you do in Rails with 1 or two lines of code would take many more in PHP. And this is an important point, because it is one of the things that makes Rails such a pleasure to use.

I'm not sure how many people are aware of this, but the person who wrote Rails was a professional PHP programmer and originally planned to write Rails in PHP. However he didn't get too far with that because of the limitations of PHP. The reason why Ruby is praised equally as much as Rails is because it is Ruby that makes Rails what it is. Its part of Rails' identity. That is why any PHP port of Rails will likely miss the point. I don't think its possible to write something as powerful but simple as ActiveRecord, certainly not something as elegant and easy to use, in PHP. Sure, there are plenty of ORM layers for PHP, including some good ones like Propel, but not one of them can get you up and running in an instant like ActiveRecord. I've searched high and low for a PHP implementation of ActiveRecord - there isn't one.

And Rails hasn't gained traction because of hype. It's gained attention because of (well-deserved) hype. But hype alone does not convince everybody to start dropping their Java/PHP/.NET toolkits and start using Rails. People are moving to Rails because they think it is better than their existing toolset, or will make a valuable addition to it. If Rails wasn't worthy of the hype its getting, people would be very quick to dispell the hype. Its just not happening, not yet. Sure, it has its detractors, but they are a minority.

And to answer your last question, we are in the process of rewriting our Intranet using RubyOnRails, a product will be available commercially once it has been road-tested internally, and we already have a potential buyer. We are also facing the prospect of redeveloping some huge UK recruitment websites (currently ASP) and the large CMS that powers them all, and will likely be doing so using RubyOnRails and PostgreSQL.

[bonefry]

bonefry: How does it not prove a thing? Out of nine million results, I'll bet you at least ten will point you to good web application frameworks for/in PHP.

Don't you realize that it could be 9 million requests for a framework ? Or 9 million failed attempts ?

[KTottE]

bonefry: Yes, and pigs could fly. If they had wings

Luke Redpath: I just want to say that I do get your point. And I agree. If I can have my pick when it comes to languages, Ruby is always at the top of the list or very close. The same with Rails actually.

I've gotten roped into writing the simplest possible CMS for a webpage (it needs to handle CRUD and that's basically it), however a problem is that I will be forced to write it in PHP. I started writing the base of it yesterday, and found myself cursing the need to actually write everything myself.

So, just wanted to point out that if I get to pick, Ruby (on Rails) is what I'll pick. However, some of the posts and opinions in this thread have just been silly, so I had to play Devil's advocate for a while.

[vgarcia]

I'll try to learn a little .NET too, but I'm not really a fan on .NET because you have to use IIS and Microsoft Access.

You don't have to use Access with .NET. You can use SQL Server and Oracle natively (and MySQL too I believe) and you can talk to almost any database via ODBC.

[Luke Redpath]

However, some of the posts and opinions in this thread have just been silly

Well, I wont disagree with you there, but I feel we may be referring to different posts

I'd still get by if I was forced into the position of using PHP, but I'd have to insist on it being PHP5 - I really just refuse to work with PHP4. Fortunately I'm a position that gives me the choice to do just that.

[bonefry]

bonefry: Yes, and pigs could fly. If they had wings

Look, I asked for a good PHP framework. You give me 9 mill results in Google and base your answer on probabilities. Give me a good PHP framework that's stable and complete and I won't bug you anymore (start searching in those 9 million results ).
Until then your argument doesn't hold, even when pigs will fly

[bonefry]

I'll try to learn a little .NET too, but I'm not really a fan on .NET because you have to use IIS and Microsoft Access.

Why don't you try Java so you can use Tomcat or JBoss on Linux ?

[KTottE]

bonefry: give me a tasty meal that's healthy for me.
Oh, you can't? What do you mean you want to know what kind of food I like?

On the first page of results out of those nine million, I found these three frameworks:
Binary Cloud
PHP.MVC
Horde

The word good in regards to programming languages/tools/frameworks is highly subjective. Which is kind of my point actually. Some people will like Ruby (and/or Rails) and some people will like PHP (and/or Binary Cloud/PHP.MVC/Horde).

[asp_funda]

Biggest problem with PHP is that it doesn't have a killer framework like Rails.

looks like you haven't seen PRADO. Its ASP.NET like framework for PHP5.