Slashdot Mirror
Interview with the Creator of Ruby
Lisa writes: "Yukihiro "Matz" Matsumoto talks about Ruby's history, the influence of Perl and Python on Ruby, and his new book, Ruby in a Nutshell. In the article he explains: "When I started the language project, I was joking with a friend that the project must be code-named after a gemstone's name (àla Perl). So my friend came up with "ruby". It's a short name for a beautiful and highly valued stone. So I picked up that name, and it eventually became the official name of the language. Later, I found out that pearl is the birthstone for June, and ruby is the birthstone for July. I believe Ruby is an appropriate name for the next language after Perl.""
Are there any plans to have Ruby use Parrot, the future shared backend for Perl and Python?
Sure, Perl and Python have their strong points. Ruby seems to have done a good job of combining the strong points of both. A lot of folks want a language that is easier to develop object oriented code in than Perl (which, as someone who has done OO Perl, I have to say it's downright ugly), and many people don't like Python's style (forced indentation - need I say more?).
It's a matter of which language fits you, the programmer, best instead of the other way around. A lot of folks find that programming in Ruby is just more natural to them than programming in either Perl or Python.
The message here is: give it a try. If it works for you and you decide that you really like it, then you've gained. If you try it out for a couple of days and decide that you don't like it, then you don't have to continue. Try it, you might like it.
It's a valid point you make, I suppose.
But what if you were to learn it because it's fun?
"Fun?" Yeah, fun.
Another point: By the time something hits the help wanted ads in large numbers it's already gotten a some percentage way through it's active life. Look at Java - a lot of people started learning it because it looked like an important technology to them at the time, there weren't many Java jobs at first. Now everybody and his brother has learned Java, so you're competing with everybody and their brother.
BTW: I did see a Ruby ad at:
http://www.postget.com/get/ad.php?id=591
So maybe it's just starting and has a lot of life ahead of it - one can only hope.
If someone INSISTS on using a scripting language to build thousands of line of code that I then have to try and maintain and enhance as a product, I'd welcome any alternative scripting language that doesn't encourage obfuscated code as much as Perl does.
I don't know if Ruby fits that bill, but it would be a reason to switch if it does.
Of course, I know that code in any language can be well documented and written so that's easy to understand. It just seems like code written in Perl is much more likely to be difficult to read than in other languages more appropriate for applications.
I'm part of a group that has had Perl code (using the OO facilities) handed off to it to maintain and fix. It contains many Packages and probaby several thousand lines of code. Not sure. I've successfully kept my name off the responsibility list for that code. It's been pure hell for the engineers that have been asked to fix it--and all it's supposed to be is a simple parser and data access interface.
I use Perl myself for my own scripting but it can be cruel and unusual punishment to be given someone else's Perl to maintain.
It's enough to make you take your clothes off and run around the office screaming "I CAN'T CODE NAKED!!! AHAHAHAHAAHAH!!!" until they put you on a different project.
Jesus saves....And takes 1/2 damage.
I've heard it described many times as: Ruby allows me to go from thought to code with the least friction of any language I've tried. I find it to be true as well.
Sure some people will still prefer Perl and other Python, but a lot of people seem to be finding that Ruby just clicks for them.
Maybe it's Matz's design philosophy "The principal of least surprise"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Other scripting languages have really hit a wall in development because of the objectless syntax, but ruby, is a piece of work.
Yeah, I can see your point. The other languages have a totally objectless syntax!
Too bad they have all hit a wall.
Though you won't find it in your job ads, having a lot of languages (and a lot of different kinds of languages at that) on your resume is a definite bonus. Especially if there's a variety of languages (procedural, OO, functional, logic etc), it shows that you can easily adapt to a new language should that become an issue.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});