Slashdot Mirror


Ruby 1.8.0 Released

waieitch writes "A long-waited new version of the scripting language, Ruby 1.8.0 has just been released. You can download from here, and the changelog is available. With many new libraries, say dRuby, ERB, REXML, this version is doubled by 1.6.8 in size."

3 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Former perl, python, java geek gone to Ruby by Fished · · Score: 4, Interesting
    For what it's worth, I've been using ruby for about six months, and am totally hooked. It is easily the best language I've ever used. Things that are idiosyncratic and difficult in other languages just flow in ruby. There are also many features to facilitate the way you actually *use* objects (e.g. to do object attributes, all you have to do is add "attr_writer attribute1, attribute2, attribute3" and "attr_reader attribute1, attribute2, attribute3") to the class defs. No more endless get and set functions all of which are more or less identical!

    This language is definitely worth a look. It's not just a python knock-off, as many have supposed -- it offers features python doesn't.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
    1. Re:Former perl, python, java geek gone to Ruby by MarkusQ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      it had the same conceptual structure as Python, but the cryptic syntax of perl

      I'm not sure what language you looked at, but it doesn't sound like ruby.

      • Ruby is a deeply object oriented in the tradition of smalltalk; python is a superfically object oriented language more in the tradition of C++ or object pascal. Until recently, for example, you could not derive your own classes from the built in classes.
      • The basic syntax of ruby is very clean (a fact which is somewhat obscured by the "syntactic sugar" provided for some commonly used features (such as operators) and the provision of aliases for some global objects that are intended to ease the transition from perl). The basic syntax is:
        method_call ::= object.method_name arg1,arg2,...argn
        where object, method_name, and the arguments can all objects and can be given by named constants, literals, variables, or expressions (method calls). The only thing I really miss from python is the indentation (or rather, not having to explicitly delimit blocks, since I indent that way even when I don't have to).
      -- MarkusQ

    2. Re:Former perl, python, java geek gone to Ruby by tigersha · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The major improvement in Ruby over Python and C++ and most OO languages (but not Smalltalk) is the inclusion of code blocks that may be passed in as a parameter to a method and its widespread use throughout the libraries.

      For a simple example, look at this:

      x = [1,2,3,4]

      x.each do |e|
      puts e
      done

      This is NOT syntactic sugar. The list class has a each method that takes a piece of code as an argument and executes it for each element in the list. This can do the same as generators now coming into the new Python and is very similar to higher-order functions in functional languages.
      Basically the do...done part is a parameter (albeit a special one, a method may only have one).

      It is difficult and syntactiucally tricky to do this in most OO languages and trivial to add an each method (or whatever you want to call it) to your own classes. It is also extremely powerful way of doing many thing which requires a lot of messiness in other languages.

      This high-erorder code blocks now allow you to really do the everything-is-anobject thing because you MUST have code blocks to implement control structures such as if or while as an object. It is also very pervasively used in all collections and for instance in REXML where you can say

      x = some XML...

      x.each( xpath expression ) do |element| ...
      done

      Another example

      String.each_regexp( regexp ) do ... done

      Does the code for each place where the regexp was found in the string. Same sort of thing can be done for databases and so forth.

      Ruby also has things like mix-in classes which are usually dissed by OO theoreticians but turn out to be very useful. Mix-in classes were pioneered by some dialect of LISP and are a form of restricted multiple inheritance,. A class can inherit methods from other modules but not instance variables (except for its parent class). This allows you to this (this is pseudocode)

      myclass inherits Ord
      implement = and other operators in terms of and = (which are supplied by your class). And now your class implements all of these methods. This is again tricky to implement in traditional top-down inheritance trees. Think of Java's interface system, but with default implementations.

      This is used to great effect in the collections to implement many things in terms of some primitve operators.

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism