Slashdot Mirror


Is Ruby Dying?

New submitter John Moses writes "I have been working with node.js a lot lately, and have been discussing with co-workers if node.js is taking steam away from Ruby at all. I think the popularity of the language is an important talking point when selecting a language and framework for a new project. A graph on the release date of gems over time could help determine an answer. The front page of RubyGems only shows data on the most popular, but I am really interested in seeing recent activity. My theory is that if developers' contributions to different gems is slowing down, then so is the popularity of the language."

400 comments

  1. Short answer: no by gentryx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Long answer: a better indicator is how many Google queries for the respective languages are issued. And those suggest that Ruby is standing stronger than ever. Ruby is more than just Rails. And just because there is yet another web apps framework, it doesn't mean that the other ones automatically lose traction.

    --
    Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    1. Re:Short answer: no by hjf · · Score: 3, Funny

      Silly programmer, you're not an "coder"! You don't know what's cool and what's not. Look at that UID. You must be like, 35! Yuck, old people!

    2. Re:Short answer: no by hjf · · Score: 2

      Oops... meant "a coder". I was going to put "an app developer" but changed my mind at the last minute...and forgot to fix the "an".

    3. Re:Short answer: no by gentryx · · Score: 1

      A case of too much plum pudding?

      --
      Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    4. Re:Short answer: no by Tchaik · · Score: 2

      Nice graph. You'll have better luck with 'javascript' than 'java script' though.

    5. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at that UID. You must be like, 35! Yuck, old people!

      That would've been more funny if you had a bigger UID....

    6. Re:Short answer: no by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about picking the best tool for the job, rather than holding a popularity contest? Too old-fashioned?

      It's good to avoid going too far off into the weeds, lest you find it impossible to hire someone to support code in some pet language, but that's not the concern here. Of the universe of languages, both mainstream and niche languages commonly used in your niche, pick the one that makes it easiest to develop and support the features in front of you.

      It's pretty obvious someone is playing "what language will look best on my resume" here, and if playing that game is obvious to me from this distance, it will be glaring to hiring managers. Few people are looking for a history of "trendy" (you'd be amazed how fast "trendy" becomes "sad" in tech), while a history of doing the dirty, unpopular, work that keeps development teams productive is always welcome, long after the tech stack fades into obsolescence.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    7. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Interesting that even though PHP's interest has declined over time (according to the same chart), it's still more popular than Python & Ruby combined.

    8. Re:Short answer: no by Lisias · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nice try (intentionally spelling "java script" is not cute, dude!).

      Here, I fixed it to you.

      Not a surprise, anyway.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    9. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the problem with google trends is that you can make them tell whatever you'd like:
      http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F06ff5%2C%20%2Fm%2F0bbxf89&cmpt=q

    10. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well thanks for your resume, we will take a look back when you have the lang we use..

    11. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And how did you control for people searching for "Ruby" that had nothing to do with the programming language?

    12. Re:Short answer: no by mothlos · · Score: 1

      As a big fan of Ruby generally, I hate to take this side, but Ruby is definitely no longer for the 'cool' kids and the community has been shrinking a bit for a while now.

      Your Google query chart is a bit wonky as it captures all sorts of oddities. Here is a revised chart which only looks at Computer + Electronics related searches using Google's categories for everything except Python, which I can't seem to figure out how to get it to appear.

    13. Re:Short answer: no by Tumbleweed · · Score: 5, Funny

      Look at that UID. You must be like, 35! Yuck, old people!

      Careful there, kid. :)

    14. Re:Short answer: no by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      I don't think necessarily that's the right metric for figuring out whether or not a language is dead.

      It's very much a fuzzy, qualitative problem.

      My best metric is, "Can you still get a job using this language? and is the work interesting?"

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    15. Re:Short answer: no by hjf · · Score: 3, Funny

      Eeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwww dirty old man!

    16. Re:Short answer: no by kelemvor4 · · Score: 3

      How about picking the best tool for the job, rather than holding a popularity contest? Too old-fashioned?

      It's good to avoid going too far off into the weeds, lest you find it impossible to hire someone to support code in some pet language, but that's not the concern here. Of the universe of languages, both mainstream and niche languages commonly used in your niche, pick the one that makes it easiest to develop and support the features in front of you.

      It's pretty obvious someone is playing "what language will look best on my resume" here, and if playing that game is obvious to me from this distance, it will be glaring to hiring managers. Few people are looking for a history of "trendy" (you'd be amazed how fast "trendy" becomes "sad" in tech), while a history of doing the dirty, unpopular, work that keeps development teams productive is always welcome, long after the tech stack fades into obsolescence.

      All these pseudo-languages look bad to me when I review resume's. If you want to impress, learn C, C++, Assembler, or a few other real languages. Ruby, C$, VB, Python etc... those can be picked up on the fly if needed.

    17. Re:Short answer: no by geekd · · Score: 0

      " Look at that UID. You must be like, 35! Yuck, old people!"

      I must be ancient.

    18. Re:Short answer: no by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      In the domain of language in which Ruby plays, I'd say Python has by far the brightest future.

      Some graphs from google trends: ruby programming, python programming and php programming. Which one of these things is not like the others? (Hint: Python).

      TIOBE data, questionable as it is.

      Search for jobs at LinkedIn:

      Ruby: 112 results
      Python: 5,151 results
      PHP: 3,046 results

      And the "programmer perception" survey Berkeley did a while back (that I think was covered at Slashdot). Check out the results for the question "This language is likely to be around for a very long time".

    19. Re:Short answer: no by Zarf · · Score: 1

      Ruby is standing stronger than ever.

      By this metric Java is still kicking everyone's butts. Also... *all* programming languages are "dying".

      I've been around the block enough times to know that if you want to survive as a programmer you had better damn well learn to program. And not in just one language, you need to know a survey of language types. Ruby is just one type in the same category as Python and Javascript. If you really want to survive 20 years as a programmer (like I did) you need to branch out more.

      Now, you kids get off my lawn.

      --
      [signature]
    20. Re:Short answer: no by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Learn C. Almost everything else draws from it. Learn C, and you're half-way to learning anything else.

    21. Re:Short answer: no by countach74 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that has absolutely nothing to do with Wordpress. :)

    22. Re:Short answer: no by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      are you sure those people aren't searching for jewels or JFK assassin killers?

    23. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using your metric, you can say Perl's future outshines them all.

    24. Re: Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Queries: ruby ruby ruby. LOL That's a song name!

    25. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oops... meant "a coder". I was going to put "an app developer" but changed my mind at the last minute...and forgot to fix the "an".

      You should have left your original post alone; the "an", as in: "an hero" would have worked. At least that was my thought, until your follow up with the correction.

    26. Re:Short answer: no by cj_n_sf · · Score: 1

      Right on! Had to comment so I could see if my uid qualifies me as an old geezer. Yep!

    27. Re:Short answer: no by dunkelfalke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem with it is that if you learn C as first language, you probably will always write C in any language. With all the ugly hacks and trying to reinvent the wheel time and time again.

      I write in C for a living, but frankly, while I love my job, I don't like the language. It is just a bit more high level than a macro assembler and full of crazy behaviour.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    28. Re:Short answer: no by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 0

      /sarcasm noobs. LOL. Always complaining about form over function.

    29. Re:Short answer: no by Evil+Pete · · Score: 0

      I nice piece of self irony considering the complainer's UID is lower than the guy who must be "over 35". Young kids these days. :-/

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    30. Re:Short answer: no by m2 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      " Look at that UID. You must be like, 35! Yuck, old people!"

      I must be ancient.

      Don't worry, fiver, you aren't.

    31. Re:Short answer: no by mellon · · Score: 2

      It probably doesn't. It probably has to do with Drupal.

    32. Re:Short answer: no by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      Wow. Still, I would not have guessed javascript would be in (apparent) decline. Sorry already blew my mod points here.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    33. Re:Short answer: no by djKing · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Wish the kids would get off my /.

      --
      Free as in "the Truth shall set you..."
    34. Re:Short answer: no by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I can get a job writing COBOL and make a lot more money then anyone can using Ruby. That doesn't mean COBOL has a great outlook.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    35. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn pseudo-code, then you're 99% to learning any language.

    36. Re:Short answer: no by geekoid · · Score: 1
      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    37. Re:Short answer: no by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I got hired at both my current and previous jobs with no expertise in the languages used, and paid quite well. Experience with the problem domain, and with doing the dirty jobs senior devs volunteers for (because dammit we can't keep working this way) is what matters. In my experience, it's only really the bottom-feeder companies that are looking for a very specific tech stack instead of "smart enough to come up to speed;" the kind of places you work when you're desperate for anything, not what you want to steer towards!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    38. Re:Short answer: no by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Well hell if THAT is the only metric that matters I need to brush up on my VB as its doing great, right up there with Python as a matter of fact.

      That said maybe I'm weird but I never understood the "Is X dying" and "Is Y gaining in popularity" I mean who gives a shit? Does it do what you need it to? Can you get your project completed using it? then STFU and use the dang thing, quit acting like a Valley girl chasing trends already! I mean you don't see the engineers going "ZOMFG my VHDL is as out of fashion as an iPhone 3!" /swoon/. So quit caring so damned much about whether the other little programmers will let you play their reindeer games and just use what works already!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    39. Re:Short answer: no by steelfood · · Score: 0

      Yuck, old people!

      Your UID is lower than GP's.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    40. Re:Short answer: no by lgw · · Score: 1

      C worries me these days, unless balanced with something modern, because the coding style that comes with good, maintainable C is entirely the wrong style in any modern language. C proves you understand pointers, and that's great don't get me wrong, but these days you had better be comfortable with exceptions too, because I'm beyond tired of seeing Pokemon code (gotta catch em all!).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    41. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I would wager the amount of google queries only shows how many "questions" you have.
      Which leas to the question if Ruby is indeed such an easy language everyone claims ;D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    42. Re:Short answer: no by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

      Don't worry about it, QA will catch it before it goes to production. That's the new world of development. Write your code as horribly as you want, someone will fix it later.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    43. Re:Short answer: no by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Quite true. Should see some of my early perl code - it worked, but there were a lot of basic perl common-sense methods I didn't know.

      I only program things as a hobby though, I'm not a professional. Most complicated thing I've written in perl is an IRC bot for a roleplay channel that handles character descriptions, logging and dice rolling.

    44. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      C is only a portable assembler. It was designed to be that by K&R.
      In other words, you don't learn anything (in fact less) that you would learn from Pascal, Modula 2, Eiffel, Sather or any other "compiled" -- "non interpreted" language.
      Heck, I would bet that 90% of he C programmers here on /. don't even know that in this:
      typedef struct {
            int a;
            short b;
            char c;
      } myType; ... the compiler is free to rearrange the order of the fields as it sees fit.

      And i bet YOU don't have 10 alarm bells ringing right now in which cases this might (or does) cause trouble.

      Basically I'm terribly tired about this: "learn C and all is good" /. myth.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    45. Re:Short answer: no by Manfre · · Score: 0

      Get off my lawn!

    46. Re:Short answer: no by JWSmythe · · Score: 0

      700k series UID. Damned kids, get off my eLawn.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    47. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you can tell who the ruby fanboy is here.

    48. Re:Short answer: no by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Hence the other half of that question.

      "Is this work interesting?"

      Prime Sense does all of their work(did?) in Perl and they just got snapped up by Apple. I think Instagram's a Ruby shop too.

      Lots of shops are still doing amazing and interesting work in PHP and Python. And Ruby for that matter.

      I think we're soon reaching a language golden age where language won't matter like it used to. Maybe some day we'll be at a place where interpreter won't matter either. But I think that kind of dream universal web development executable isn't going to happen.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    49. Re:Short answer: no by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      Now add Perl to your graph...

    50. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      the compiler is free to rearrange the order of the fields as it sees fit.

      No, it is not. ISO/IEC 9899:1999, 6.7.2.1 "Structure and union specifiers", paragraph 13:

      "Within a structure object, the non-bit-field members and the units in which bit-fields reside have addresses that increase in the order in which they are declared. A pointer to a structure object, suitably converted, points to its initial member (or if that member is a bit-field, then to the unit in which it resides), and vice versa. There may be unnamed padding within a structure object, but not at its beginning."

      The C++ standard has a similar provision. What's unspecified is whether there is any padding between the fields.

    51. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3

      Oh, one other thing that's different in C++: the relative order of fields in a struct/class in different visibility blocks is unspecified. So, for example, in this one the fields must be ordered:

      class foo {
      public:
        int x;
        int y;
        int z;
      };

      Whereas in this one, x and y must be ordered exactly as specified, but z may precede or follow them:

      class foo {
      public:
        int x;
        int y;
      public:
        int z;
      };

    52. Re:Short answer: no by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      400k get off my elawn :)

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    53. Re:Short answer: no by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Depends on the job.

      If you're going in for a web development shop, C, C++, LISP, and ASM are just potential signs that we're wasting the applicants time, or they're wasting ours.

      I mean, granted if you're looking for someone who can help handle billions upon billions of transactions per second, having someone who knows their way around with a real language is handy.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    54. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      TIOBE is not a particularly good metric, IMO. PyPL (which counts search results for "X tutorial") is a better indicator of which language is popular to learn today (which, quite obviously, translates to its popularity in short term).

    55. Re:Short answer: no by Algae_94 · · Score: 0

      I'd really like to know why you think "an coder" is okay. "an hero" is also not okay.

    56. Re:Short answer: no by hutsell · · Score: 2

      Long answer: a better indicator is how many Google queries for the respective languages are issued. And those suggest that Ruby is standing stronger than ever. Ruby is more than just Rails. And just because there is yet another web apps framework, it doesn't mean that the other ones automatically lose traction.

      The Google trends supplied in your link used generic search terms, seriously skewing the results inaccurately about programming languages. Stuff about reptiles, famous comedy acts and things such as an infamous Italian scandal (and whatever else) were being included. By replacing the display with terms specific to programming, this version showing trends for searches about programming languages in Ruby, JavaScript, PHP, Java and Nodejs should show something a little more meaningful.

      Since the summary is more interested in just Ruby and Node and those trends with the other 3 are difficult evaluate, showing those two together, separated from the others, helps in the evaluation. (I left out Python, not due to any agenda of my own; there were problems with the search terms I wasn't able to resolve.) Fwiw, when it comes to the top regional preferences for these two languages: Japan is for Ruby while South Korea & Iran are for Nodejs. (Cuba prefers PHP).

      --
      Yesterday's Weirdness is Tomorrow's Reason Why
    57. Re:Short answer: no by reikae · · Score: 2

      Am I misunderstanding what you mean with the struct member reordering? According to this Stack Overflow question's accepted answer the compiler isn't allowed to do reordering. I don't see why typedef would change that, but I freely admit I'm in the 90% of C programmers, hence this post.

    58. Re:Short answer: no by Algae_94 · · Score: 2

      Wordpress runs far more websites than Drupal. Drupal sites probably have more useful content though.

    59. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously dude? You didn't see his explanation for the slipup posted over 3 hours before your post?

    60. Re:Short answer: no by mellon · · Score: 2

      Very true, but I suspect the reason behind this phenomenon is that people who use Wordpress are looking for something they don't _have_ to program.

    61. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd really like to know why you think "an coder" is okay. "an hero" is also not okay.

      If you're referring to the misuse of grammar, then you're right.

      "An Hero" is a reference to an infamous internet meme about a "televised" suicide by a teenager; which was followed by an eulogy about his heroism that repeatedly refer to him with the grammatically incorrect "an" hero.

      Personally, the "an coder" repurposing seemed appropriate. Even though I now know otherwise, I still like the grandiose silliness of "I am an coder". Otoh, if the clarification is about being offended, all I can say is "I am an coder".

    62. Re:Short answer: no by madprof · · Score: 1

      The first few thousand all signed up within a day or so of each other in this valiant effort to combat trolls IIRC. I actually thought it would work too. Hahaha.

    63. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ruby is a term that is not only related to the programming language, so this is more correct

    64. Re:Short answer: no by hjf · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm only 30!

    65. Re:Short answer: no by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Who you callin' "kid", kid?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    66. Re:Short answer: no by hutsell · · Score: 1

      Now add Perl to your graph...

      Ruby vs Node or Ruby vs Node vs Perl

      --
      Yesterday's Weirdness is Tomorrow's Reason Why
    67. Re: Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you compare node and ruby it shows a pretty disparate picture.

    68. Re:Short answer: no by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Interesting that even though PHP's interest has declined over time (according to the same chart), it's still more popular than Python & Ruby combined."

      Not so surprising. PHP had the advantage that it was the first common server-side language to have nearly universal support. It is ridiculously easy to write a simple PHP app. The difficulties arise when you try to do something complicated.

      My point is that PHP makes it really, really easy for newbies to write simple server-side scripts, for the simple reason that it's supported by Apache in most default installations, and needs nothing else.

      The other thing is that its early advantage meant also that it was widely adopted, for better or worse. And when something gets that widely adopted, it's going to stick around. Because something that works, works. Heck... they're still advertising for COBOL programmers, you know? That doesn't mean I'd recommend to somebody to go learn COBOL in order to get a programming job.

      Nor would I recommend PHP, except as a very basic, introductory learning course.

    69. Re:Short answer: no by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      The first few thousand all signed up within a day or so of each other in this valiant effort to combat trolls IIRC. I actually thought it would work too. Hahaha.

      I didn't bother getting an account at first as there wasn't any benefit to it. Then the "first post" shitheads started up and I figured it was worth a shot. Unfortunately, the initial moderation system was the last time they tried innovating anything at /. :(

    70. Re:Short answer: no by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

      But its got GEMS! It's a whole shiny precious stone paradigm! What could possibly be better than that?

    71. Re:Short answer: no by NormalVisual · · Score: 2

      Really. It's all about how many check-ins your boss sees from your account every week.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    72. Re:Short answer: no by Dicky · · Score: 1

      Can I help you youngsters with something?

      --
      Paranoia isn't an infectious condition, it's a way of life
    73. Re:Short answer: no by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Whoa! I took where you stop and look what I found!

      Java, as it appears, still matters!

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    74. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously dude? You didn't see his explanation for the slipup posted over 3 hours before your post?

      Your post doesn't make any sense. It has nothing to do with the parent.

    75. Re:Short answer: no by Ken_g6 · · Score: 1

      It takes more specificity than that to rule out things like Ruby slippers, Ruby Sparks, Monty Python, and, yes, Java and scripts.

      If I focus on web backends, it looks like Ruby on Rails has plateaued, or is dying - although J2EE is dying faster.

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
    76. Re:Short answer: no by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Actually, the new world of development is to release to production, then patch like mad and hope the database hasn't been totally trashed.

    77. Re: Short answer: no by alta · · Score: 1

      I'm 37. Using your logic does my UID match?

      Btw, I don't program any longer, at least not for my job. Moved to upper management...

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    78. Re: Short answer: no by alta · · Score: 2

      Nice to meet you fellow 4...

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    79. Re:Short answer: no by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      Which metric? I included four candidates. Let's look at how perl fares on each, in order:

      1. Google trend data for perl programming. That certainly doesn't bear out the assertion that perl's where its at. In fact, it looks more like the trend line for Ruby and PHP. Which is to say asymptotically approaching zero.

      2. TIOBE. Perl doesn't fare very well here either, ranking 12th in Dec. 2013 after having ranked 9th in Dec. 2012. Python is stead at 8th. PHP is steady at 6th. Ruby looks more like perl, falling from 10th to 13th.

      3. Jobs at LinkedIn. Perl: 132 results. Better than Ruby, but vastly less than Python and PHP.

      4. Programmer perception survey. Specifically, the question "This language is likely to be around for a very long time." Python is rated most likely to be around for a long time, followed by perl, then Ruby, then PHP.

      So I gotta ask...how does even one of these metrics suggest that Perl's future "outshines them all"?

    80. Re:Short answer: no by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Per PyPL's numbers PHP has the most market share, but Python is right behind. And, whereas PHP is trending negatively, Python has a fairly significant upward trend. If both trends continue then Python and PHP should have swapped places by this time next year. At least Ruby's trend is flat here instead of negative. However, it has only a quarter of Python's share and and the gap projects to grow wider still. Your mileage may vary, but if it were me choosing one of these three in which to invest my time...I'm pretty sure I wouldn't go with Ruby.

    81. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      the compiler is free to rearrange the order of the fields as it sees fit.

      Spoken like someone who clearly doesn't code C at all. If your compiler reorders your struct members, you need a new compiler. The padding between those struct members isn't guaranteed, unless you use something like #pragma pack or something.

      Basically I'm terribly tired about this: "learn C and all is good" /. myth.

      Perhaps if you had learned C, you'd understand why this is not a myth.

    82. Re:Short answer: no by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Instagram is Python apparently. Search for "Python" on that page.

    83. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's Pokemon code?

      And have you seen code which handles exceptions? I mean handles every possible exception, at the correct level, so it can do something meaningful*. To my eyes its way messier, but even objectively it's not that much better.

      * Yes, I write C code which can handle OOM conditions (large or small allocations) and keep servicing and completing requests. All my data structures have zero memory overhead--lists, trees, hashes, etc--so there are fewer operations which can fail. I also use the RAII paradigm, and although unlike in C++ I don't get automatic cleanup, the pattern reduces the complexity of resource management.

      The answer to not having exceptions is to think more carefully about your code. Exceptions are usually used as crutches to allow people to be lazy and messy. If you look at well-written C code and well-written C++/Java/C#, I wouldn't assume that the latter would be smaller or more concise.

    84. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By zero memory over-heard I meant that my list, tree, and hash implementations don't internally allocate memory. Sibling and parent pointers are defined as members of the objects to be stored in the structure.

    85. Re:Short answer: no by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Oops

      Still. a quick list of services that use Ruby aren't anything to laugh at and you can clearly still do awesome and interesting things in Ruby.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    86. Re:Short answer: no by Jack9 · · Score: 2

      > How about picking the best tool for the job, rather than holding a popularity contest? Too old-fashioned?

      How do you judge best tool for the job? That isn't an objective question. How would I know if Ruby is the right tool for me?

      The more useful question is "what does the tool offer" and Ruby doesn't have much going for it. If you are using a tool that uses Ruby (like Gherkin), you have a compelling reason to use Ruby. The cost tradeoffs, for integrating one of the many equivalent languages, usually results in the language of least resistance. This doesn't bode well for that language as the primary driver for adoption...excepting when the language has no real competition, as happened with ECMAScript->javascript in the browser.

      You want Ruby/Python/Go to become the most common language and last beyond your lifetime? Get the major browsers to integrate runtimes for those languages. What happened to browser development? Instead of speeding up rendering by 12% I would gladly trade the ability to write and serve client side code in Ruby and have Mozilla automatically (with permission) download a runtime for it. Even if the performance sucked or the features were hobbled.

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    87. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No you can't. That would be a lie.

    88. Re:Short answer: no by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      none of the compilers I had for dos rearranged them ;)...

      surely then it might cause trouble if you assumed that compiler didn't rearrange them but did and if you assumed they were in that order then in memory... ... but why even bother pointing out something like that? and who in this day and age uses tricks like that?

      (anyhow if it did rearrange them as fit then I dunno.. maybe 97% of all file format readers of various formats would just crash, nnooo?)

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    89. Re:Short answer: no by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      If it makes you feel better, I lurked for a long time, otherwise I'd probably have a 4 digit UID. :)

      [slides an eDrink to silas] Happy holidays.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    90. Re:Short answer: no by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Well, it does save a lot of money. No more beta testers, let the paying customers do it for you. :) Plenty of them will do free advertising for you, even if you charge them a premium to be "early adopters". Hell, Google Glass is $1,500 for a $200 toy.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    91. Re:Short answer: no by dkf · · Score: 1

      Java, as it appears, still matters!

      Of course. Java is the new COBOL; we're going to be stuck with it for the next few decades.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    92. Re:Short answer: no by madprof · · Score: 2

      I kind of miss the hot grits and petrified Natalie Portman. Kind of. I also miss chicken pox.

    93. Re:Short answer: no by q.kontinuum · · Score: 1
      --
      Trolling is a art!
    94. Re:Short answer: no by q.kontinuum · · Score: 1

      That must be the first competition "Mine is smaller than yours" I've seen among men...

      --
      Trolling is a art!
    95. Re:Short answer: no by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      Sorry, wrong. The 'correct' grammar as taught to me in school was to use the definite article 'a' when the noun referred to starts with a consonant, and 'an' when the noun starts with a vowel. Critically, this rule *regards 'H' as a vowel*, leading to the correct usages:
        An hero
        An hotel
        An hovel

      Personally I think it's dumb to regard H as a vowel in this context, but that's what I was taught.

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    96. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The stackoverflow answer is wrong. As so often :D
      The compiler is allowed to rearrange what ever it likes, the typedef does not change that, but I prefer to give my structs a type name. Perhaps I should reword my post, rearranging is not the problem but certainly padding is. I read the stackoverflow comment to be sure: if you check the answer, the guy is referring to the C99 standard. Perhaps meanwhile rules regarding rearranging have changed. (I don't program anymore in C and C++, well lets say: I do that very rarely)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    97. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Yeah it seems since 99 standards this got changed. I'm pretty sure that in older standards the compiler could also rearrange, not only pad (especially if there where alternating float/doubles and integral types).

      The main point is that because the fact that "traditionally" long, int, short, char etc. can have different sizes, a struct like this:
      struct {
            char c;
            short s;
            int i;
            long l;
      }; // intentionally from "smaller" size to "bigger"
      might look in memory completely different on different architectures. In our days this is ofc. less important where 64bit processors widely use more or less the same sizes for such types (isn't meanwhile char even defined to be exactly one byte?)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    98. Re:Short answer: no by fatphil · · Score: 1

      > The compiler is allowed to rearrange what ever it likes

      No, no, no, no, no. See shutdown -p's post (all he missed was mentioning trailing padding that might be necessary for alignment within an array, but as that doesn't affect any of the members of the structure, it didn't need mentioning).

      > Perhaps I should reword my post

      Perhaps you should just admit you were wrong, or just walk away. Certainly what you shouldn't do is dig yourself deeper, and pretend to be superior by including things like this in your posts:

      > The stackoverflow answer is wrong. As so often :D

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    99. Re: Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "a" is not a definite article. "the" is the definite article.

    100. Re: Short answer: no by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      My mistake -- the indefinite article.

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    101. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      Yeah, should have removed the last line after I checked the post and notices that it refers to a newer C standard. I forgot about that.
      Padding is only a specific form of rearranging ... so bottom line I was not wrong. My point mainly is: a big deal of so called "C experts" and "you only need C" advocates have not much clue about "their language".
      I'm pretty sure in C standards before 99 it was allowed to change the order of fields inside a struct. Especially if the struct contains floats/doubles and integral types.

      "The compiler is allowed to rearrange what ever it likes" No, no, no, no, no. See shutdown -p's post

      Perhaps you should read both of his posts? The one about a class with public and private fields e.g.
      And yes: there is plenty of more where the compiler is allowed to "rearrange" in the sense of changing the order. E.g. global variables are not guarantied to be in memory in the order they are defined in code. Same for local variables. There is no guaranty that they are in the order of definition on the stack.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    102. Re:Short answer: no by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Of course, if you add PHP into that Google Trends query, you'll see that PHP's total, while declining over the years, is the same as the other four combined in October 2013. That being said, the best tool for the job isn't always the same as the most popular tool. If Ruby is the best tool for the application you are working on, then use that regardless of whether another framework/programming language is the hot new thing.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    103. Re:Short answer: no by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

      h can be thought of as an aspiration instruction (i.e. breath out whilst saying the next vowel), rather than a consonant.

      --
      John_Chalisque
    104. Re:Short answer: no by Chemisor · · Score: 1

      "Unspecified" simply means that the C++ standards committee did not have the balls to specify it. Any compiler still have to follow the expectations of the programmers that use it, and one such expectation is that the compiler is not to rearrange data structures. Any compiler that does, will get dropped faster than a hot potato, standard or no standard.

    105. Re:Short answer: no by fatphil · · Score: 2

      C++ isn't C.
      Global variables aren't structure members.
      Local variables aren't structure members.

      You cannot correct mistakes about structure members in C by making statements about C++, global variables, or local variables.

      And quite why you've assumed there's a stack for local variables I don't know - there's no mention of local variables being on a "stack" in the C standard. Architectures which didn't use a stack for local variables never had stack overflows, there was much to be said for them.

      I do not feel you are qualified to make comments about so-called C experts.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    106. Re:Short answer: no by lgw · · Score: 1

      What's Pokemon code?

      "Gotta catch em all". Code that catches all exceptions all over the place, because the author wasn't comfortable with exceptions and wants each function to return an error code when there's an error, because that's the way our forefathers did it and that's the way it's done!

      Well written code in a modern language can be 20% or so of the size of well-written C code. You don't have to have the "clean up block" at the bottom of each function, so you can naturally return/throw from anywhere. You don't have to test each function call for errors (unless you can actually recover from that error), you just let exceptions happen.

      All the boilerplate clutter goes away, and your code becomes your business logic. Except in Java - Java just adds back that 80% boilerplate with different boilerplate because fuck Java.

      result = SomeFuntion(a, b, c);
      if (SUCCESS != result)
      {
          Log(ERROR, "something something something");
          goto Error;
      }

      (or whatever hack people who are scared of goto use). becomes

      SomeFuntions(a, b, c);

      with no mess at the bottom of the function.

      The answer to not having exceptions is to think more carefully about your code. Exceptions are usually used as crutches to allow people to be lazy and messy.

      Perhaps. But spend enough years cleaning up after the guys who weren't careful, and you'll vastly prefer a language that does something acceptable even when the original author was sloppy.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    107. Re:Short answer: no by aces_of_clubs · · Score: 1

      Old guys like me not engage in lang flavour wars anymore ... prefer read books like ISBN-10: 0763776270 Algorithms, Languages, Automata, & Compilers A Practical Approach

    108. Re: Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      English certainly is an weird language...

    109. Re:Short answer: no by Lisias · · Score: 1

      I hope you're right.

      THe best salaries around here, nowadays, are paid to COBOL programmers! :-)

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    110. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best post I've read in years! Thanks!

    111. Re:Short answer: no by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      " Look at that UID. You must be like, 35! Yuck, old people!"

      I must be ancient.

      Ehh... not ancient enough :)

    112. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The same clause is present in the C89 standard. It may be something that was true in very early compilers before standardization.

      With respect to char and byte, it's pretty much required to be one and the same (really, char is the fundamental unit in the spec - everything else is measured in chars). But it does not have to be an 8-bit byte. There are architectures out there, like SHARC, where sizeof(char)==sizeof(short)==sizeof(int)==1, but value range is 2^16 for all of those.

    113. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You're wrong here. Compilers can and do use a great deal of leeway when optimizing around unspecified behavior. For example, g++ often assumes that "this" is never null, and also that two pointers of different types cannot alias. While I'm not aware of any compiler that reorders fields, it's not because there is some expectation on behalf of the programmers there - who in their sane mind would depend on fields being ordered across visibility specifiers, and why?

    114. Re:Short answer: no by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that before an unobstructed open-mouthed sound at the beginning of a word, you make a phonetic liason with the vowel sound of a preceding indefinite article. H is obstructive enough not to make the liason. Y is as well, "a unique".

    115. Re:Short answer: no by cluening · · Score: 1

      I wish I knew 15 years ago that it would be cool to have a really low slashdot UID, otherwise I wouldn't have waited so long to sign up for one.

      --
      Posted from the wireless couch.
    116. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well, I only remember that short less/equal int less/equal long was required, I'm not sure what was about char.
      Luckily I never had real problems with padding/rearranging and/or sizes of data types or structs. But I had plenty of code to debug where issues like this where the reason.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    117. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      I said: "the compiler my rearrange what it wants"
      You said "wrong", I gave examples.
      That has nothing to do with the struct stuff ... stop arguing for nothing.

      Architectures which didn't use a stack for local variables never had stack overflows, there was much to be said for them. And? What exactly do you want to say with that? In the end locals have to be on a stack or on the heap, both can "overflow". (In the end means: after registers are exhausted, register contents needs to be saved somewhere to be able to use them again for the next function call)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    118. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, wrong. The 'correct' grammar as taught to me in school was to use the definite article 'a' when the noun referred to starts with a consonant, and 'an' when the noun starts with a vowel. Critically, this rule *regards 'H' as a vowel*, leading to the correct usages: An hero An hotel An hovel

      Personally I think it's dumb to regard H as a vowel in this context, but that's what I was taught.

      Not only is the Whoosh strong here in this thread, I also learned that an AC post won't show after 200+ comments; even at the lowest moderation level until a reload of "all comments" is made. Even then, the earlier comments made by any ACs are placed after the ones made later by any UIDs.

      Besides the occasional whoosh confusion, if an AC's original idea has any interesting value, a(n) UID into being a mod whore can (intentionally) copy it, getting the kudos and points for the idea. Dastardly Bastards!

      Merry Christmas, you filthy animals! And a happy New Year!

    119. Re: Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The rule "I before E except after C or when sounded as A, as in neighbor and weigh" is weird and unscientific.

    120. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You can derive some other requirements from LONG_MAX etc. Char has to be at least 8 value bits (and for unsigned, it cannot have padding), but it can be larger. Short must have at least 16 value bits, and long must have at least 32. And then there is the sizeof equation that you mentioned - char is implicitly a part of it because sizeof reports size in chars.

    121. Re:Short answer: no by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 1

      no...its blame it on the APIs changing methods and data types/fields.

      it also works on customers too.

      --
      never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
    122. Re:Short answer: no by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 1

      that's ridiculous.

      a union to that struct can pull the individual bytes right outta it, regardless of how they are type-d, so what your are saying can't be true.

      that's just a simple obvious answer...others exist.

      --
      never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
    123. Re:Short answer: no by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      In the C99 standard, there are definitions that make char and byte effectively the same size. The standard purposely leaves out a definition of exactly how big that is in terms of bits.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    124. Re:Short answer: no by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      C is only a portable assembler. It was designed to be that by K&R. ...

      Basically I'm terribly tired about this: "learn C and all is good" /. myth.

      Strangely, I'm terribly tired of the "C is a portable assembler" myth. It's not, it's a high level language, albeit a small one.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    125. Re:Short answer: no by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      Well it was a joke, considering I have an even lower UID and am over 60. And yeah I feel your pain. Hmm, modded down because somebody is humour deficient. Ah well, that is so slashdot.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    126. Re:Short answer: no by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1

      I started with C, and I absolutely loved it (and still do). I also grew to love ruby's mix of OO and functional programming -- C features neither of these. Go figure.

      I'd say becoming a good C coder flexes certain muscles that are essential to being a great software designer/programmer in general, but it doesn't flex all of them.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    127. Re:Short answer: no by synaptik · · Score: 2

      Git off my lawn.

      --
      HSJ$$*&#^!#+++ATH0
      NO CARRIER
    128. Re:Short answer: no by rve · · Score: 1

      Depends on the job.

      If you're going in for a web development shop, C, C++, LISP, and ASM are just potential signs that we're wasting the applicants time, or they're wasting ours.

      I mean, granted if you're looking for someone who can help handle billions upon billions of transactions per second, having someone who knows their way around with a real language is handy.

      I'd be very interested to hear about a billions upon billions of transactions per second system based on any technology :)

    129. Re: Short answer: no by NeoTron · · Score: 1

      There should be a special area for <5 digit UID's - call it the Slashdot Elders Area or something ;)

    130. Re:Short answer: no by bjohnson · · Score: 1

      Youngster

    131. Re: Short answer: no by bjohnson · · Score: 1

      Slashdot Home for Old Farts

      "Wait a minute, That scruffy beard, those suspenders, that smug expression.You're one of those condescending Unix users!"

      http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-06-24/

    132. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      Well, then read a book about C? Or something about its history. And frankly, learn some assembly, too. There a macro assemblers around that are more highlevel (and less portable, obviously) than C.
      C was designed to be a portable assembler. It evolved ...
      Meanwhile it is both a semi high level language and still a portable assembler, ask the founders: they designed it like that.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    133. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      So it is finally defined that short minimum needs to be 16 bits? And long minimum 32? Seems I missed that, too!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    134. Re: Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An HTTP is the most widely use language in the universe of computer languages. Two massive fortunes have been made on it: Google and Facebook.

    135. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It has also been defined since C89. In particular, it required the following minimum values of constants defined in limits.h:

      CHAR_BITS: 8
      SCHAR_MIN: -127
      SCHAR_MAX: 127
      UCHAR_MAX: 255
      SHRT_MIN: -32767
      SHRT_MAX: 32767
      USHRT_MAX: 65535
      LONG_MIN: -2147483647
      LONG_MAX: 2147483647
      ULONG_MAX: 4294967295

      Since those define the range of the corresponding types, and the spec requires representation to be binary, they effectively define the minimum number of bits. The same header requires int to be at least as long as short.

      Note that for signed types, the min and max values are the same modulo sign, and exclude the minimum value in two's complement - e.g. signed char has a minimum permitted range of -127..127, not -128..127. That's because they wanted one's complement and sign bit to be valid representations for integers, as well (this is made explicit in C99, where those three formats are enumerated as the only valid ones).

    136. Re:Short answer: no by fatphil · · Score: 2

      You gave irrelevant examples. Your depth of misunderstanding in this entire thread - starting with your own initial post - is horrifying. Please develop reading skills more advanced than a 5-year-old.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    137. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Seems we are talking about two different things.
      The file limits.h always was compiler/vendor or at least CPU specific.
      I rather would not try to draw conclusions from the values in limit.h towards the actual standard. However, I'm no expert in C, or in other words, did not follow its evolution since 1989 or so, as I switched to C++ at that time. So I take your word for it ;) Regarding C++ standards, very long they never where followed (at least usually not complete, especially not on windows), so it was always wise to actually read the .h files or the manual from the vendor.
      However it is nice to know that finally some basic agreements on sizes (how helpfull they might be is still a question imho) where made. I mean, the latest C code I had to read was still full with ugly #define u_int32 unigned int and other stuff like this. I wonder why they never simply agree on types/typenames like int16 / int32 when every serious programm is full with either typedefed or #define'd helpers like that. Ofc, it would limit the vendors abilities to create a compiler for very odd word sizes, like 9 or 11 bits, but how likely is it that such architectures will come up again?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    138. Re:Short answer: no by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Seems we are talking about two different things.
      The file limits.h always was compiler/vendor or at least CPU specific.

      You misunderstood me. What I quoted was the wording of the ISO C Standard which sets the requirements for what the values of limits.h must be, and not any particular header. Of course, any specific implementation can have different values in that header, but the Standard requires them to be at least as large as the numbers that I've quoted.

      Regarding C++ standards, very long they never where followed (at least usually not complete, especially not on windows), so it was always wise to actually read the .h files or the manual from the vendor.

      I'm actually not aware of any C++ implementation that would not follow the requirements I've quoted. C++ inherited it from C since the very first version of the ISO standard back in 1998, and compilers have generally been agreeable with it largely because they have themselves usually evolved from C compilers, and have already implemented that part of the spec.

      However it is nice to know that finally some basic agreements on sizes (how helpfull they might be is still a question imho) where made. I mean, the latest C code I had to read was still full with ugly #define u_int32 unigned int and other stuff like this. I wonder why they never simply agree on types/typenames like int16 / int32 when every serious programm is full with either typedefed or #define'd helpers like that. Ofc, it would limit the vendors abilities to create a compiler for very odd word sizes, like 9 or 11 bits, but how likely is it that such architectures will come up again?

      It has been dealt with in C99 and in C++11. We now have a new header, stdint.h, which defines typedefs like int32_t and uint16_t.

      They did, in fact, account for odd word sizes, as well. The header actually defines several families of types, like so:

      int8_t, int16_t, int32_t, int64_t, ...
      int_least8_t, ...
      int_fast8_t, ...

      Now, types from the intN_t family are optional - an implementation is not required to provide them. However, it must provide a specific typedef if it does have an integer type with the exact matching number of bits. So if e.g. long is 32-bit, then it must provide int32_t. Or, for some exotic architecture with, say, a 24-bit word, if int corresponds to that word, then it must provide int24_t.

      int_leastN_t and int_fastN_t, in contrast, are required to be always available for 8, 16, 32 and 64 bits (and optionally available for any other random N). As the names imply, those aren't actually guaranteed to have N representation bits - int_leastN_t is the smallest integer type with at least that many bits, and int_fastN_t is the fastest integer type with that many bits (usually, this is the native word if N is smaller than word size).

      There's also [u]intmax_t, which is guaranteed to be able to hold any value of any other integer type provided, and intptr_t, which is guaranteed to be castable to a pointer and back without losing any data. And then there are a bunch of macros to specify literals of those types, to obtain max/min values for them etc - which in case of intN_t types can also be used to query for their existence with an #ifdef. Of course, most people don't bother and just assume that those are always available, which is true on all but the most exotic platforms (like the aforementioned SHARC, where the smallest addressable memory unit is the 32-bit word, and hence it cannot provide int8_t or int16_t efficiently).

      gcc had all these for ages. VC++ was lagging quite a bit (since it was only following the C++ spec, and kept C at C89 level) - it only got the header in VS 2010. But for the last 4 years, it is possible to use all this to write code that is fully portable across all major platforms and compilers.

    139. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I have to thank you, I hope you refrain from sending me a bill!
      Quite interesting informations, thanx again.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    140. Re:Short answer: no by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      Please, get a life. That basically means: stop insulting other people!
      I made a mistake by picking my first example.
      Three people noticed.
      Hence, my conclusion, that 90% (if not fare more) of the C programmers have no,clue about C and hence have no idea how low level their prefered language actually is holds And that is all I wanted to point out.
      Learning C in our times to become a "coder" / "programmer" / "developer" is certainly not the 'best thing to do' (and looking at how other languages work: a waste of time)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    141. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first few thousand all signed up within a day or so of each other in this valiant effort to combat trolls IIRC. I actually thought it would work too. Hahaha.

      I didn't bother getting an account at first as there wasn't any benefit to it. Then the "first post" shitheads started up and I figured it was worth a shot. Unfortunately, the initial moderation system was the last time they tried innovating anything at /. :(

      Who has number one? Wait, this is slashdot, that would be: Who has the UID for zero? Kidding aside, is there a list or directory of some sort?

    142. Re:Short answer: no by bsa3 · · Score: 1

      Your modems are Hayes-compatible? My, that's new-fangled.

    143. Re: Short answer: no by NeoTron · · Score: 1

      Hey! I shave occasionally!

    144. Re:Short answer: no by tedgyz · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. Anybody under the age of 35 does not knows the propper grammar anyways.

      --
      "No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
    145. Re: Short answer: no by sean.seanlynch · · Score: 1

      Either, or neither of their leisurely foreigners seized and forfeited the weird height. The deficient finanancier was sufficiently efficient. Other than those, 'science' is easy to remember because the I and the e are both clearly pronounced. Isn't 5th grade English fun?

    146. Re:Short answer: no by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering whether it should be "an eulogy" as eulogy starts with a ~consonant sound (y) but it's spelled with a vowel. Personally, I go with anything that starts with a vowel *sound* getting an "an."

      Also see a lot of occurrences of "an historic X."

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    147. Re:Short answer: no by sauge · · Score: 1

      Nevermind facebook or the other mega sites out there that might have software in C/C++. :)

    148. Re:Short answer: no by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      An historic X would be correct (the adjective starts with a vowel). So would an eulogy (y is really a vowel, in this case).

      In both cases, I disagree, because it's just dumb. But that's the rule ... can we change the rule?

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    149. Re:Short answer: no by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      I suppose it's kind of idiotic for me to argue that the rule is stupid when I normally use whichever rule is in play to bludgeon people with, yeah. Damn.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    150. Re:Short answer: no by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      I like you :)

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    151. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm wondering whether it should be "an eulogy" as eulogy starts with a ~consonant sound (y) but it's spelled with a vowel. Personally, I go with anything that starts with a vowel *sound* getting an "an."

      Also see a lot of occurrences of "an historic X."

      The problem occurs in this case because there's more than one way to pronounce eulogy. My guess is that you're sounding it out as if it's, "you-logy". The other way states the first two letters very quickly; something like, "eeuel-logy".

      I think this may have been the same problem with history. History used to be said with all or more emphasis on the letter "i"; similar to Honor, only this is being all on the "o". Personally, I'd like to see it be officially acceptable for the rule to constantly change with the times.

    152. Re:Short answer: no by Lisias · · Score: 1

      You spelled Javascript wrongly (it was not an accident, uh?), and your query about Ruby is too generic: you're counting queries about the stones too.

      Your post is a fallacy, and it worries me that enough people find it "insightful".

      Here, I made a good query for you. Ruby is in *serious* declining.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    153. Re:Short answer: no by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Damn... I should stop drinking... I don't believe I posted TWICE on the same subject... X-|

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    154. Re:Short answer: no by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Weird.

      J2EE, J2ME (!!) and J2SE appears to be all in the same level: oblivion. Even "Java Platform" is almost done.

      But, "Java the Language" is still strong (because Android, I think).

      Oracle effect, perhaps?

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    155. Re:Short answer: no by gentryx · · Score: 1

      Since you seem to believe that a simple typo represents a fallacy, I dare say that your conclusion "Ruby is in serious declining" is a fallacy by itself: in your link Ruby's curve appears to be rather stable (2% over the past 5 years). In my world decline means something different.

      You're right though that your search terms are more suitable.

      --
      Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    156. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am tired of the C is portable assembler bullshit.

      It was never really true but with processor changes over the years it is less true.

      If you want a portable assembler, Nasm is probably as close as you can get.

    157. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you just admit you are a dumbshit and move on?

      Until you can directly manipulate the CPU registers, L1, L2 and call opcodes in C, it is not a portable assembler.

      Now STFU you moron.

    158. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn it!

      Another stupid post from you?

      WTF?

    159. Re:Short answer: no by vilanye · · Score: 1

      gems is a huge plus for Ruby.

      Bundler makes it even better.

    160. Re:Short answer: no by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      Indeed, all of that is very childish.

      Also, I beat you.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    161. Re:Short answer: no by RoloDMonkey · · Score: 1

      Try spelling JavaScript as one word and you will see something very different: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=ruby%2C%20python%2C%20javascript&cmpt=q

      --
      Long live the Speaker Bracelet
      Rolo D. Monkey
    162. Re:Short answer: no by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Isnt there a Ruby to JS compiler?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    163. Re:Short answer: no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Isnt there a Ruby to JS compiler?

      I think cross compilers are a hard sell to management for scripting. As an example, you would need javascript staff AND ruby staff.
      Cross compiling results in added complexity. Which is to blame when there's slowness? Is it a ruby algorithm or idiom, inefficient generated javascript, or a combination? I have seen a couple employers try to use it and give up or replace the entire staff with Javascript coders. I'm not a dedicated javascript guy, so I don't survive the latter. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has been in a shop, which transitioned to cross compiled (coffeescript, etc) javascript and was on project with a million lines or more. That's pretty specific.

  2. Let's Hope! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I sure hope so. Ruby is just too much overhead for not enough deliverables. Ugh. Ruby is do "ugh" that it makes me want to use PHP.

    1. Re:Let's Hope! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perl and Python are also slow as shit.

  3. Netcraft Confirms It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: Ruby is dying.

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Ruby community when IDC confirmed that Ruby market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all languages. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Ruby has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Ruby is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent programmers survey.

    You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin to predict Ruby's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Ruby faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Ruby because Ruby is dying. Things are looking very bad for Ruby. As many of us are already aware, Ruby continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    1. Re:Netcraft Confirms It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wattup Guido!

  4. Dying? It's already dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one in my department will touch it anymore, despite it being the choice just a few years ago.

  5. Node.js? Dude, that was so last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cool kids are using Go for their server apps and infrastructure projects.

  6. oblig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Netcraft confirms it (http://everything2.com/title/BSD+is+dying)

    -I'm just saying

  7. Re:Node.js? Dude, that was so last year by Lisias · · Score: 2

    The cool kids are using Go for their server apps and infrastructure projects.

    While their parents are taking real jobs and paying the bills!

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  8. Re:This is god. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You are all fucking bastards who need to get raped by horses.

    Seems legit.

  9. ruby is obnoxious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Making a scripting language be mandatory OO is just annoying. Do your developers really suck so bad they can't write a couple scripts without it devolving into spaghetti? Both Python and Ruby feel like reactions to Perl that went way too far, Python with its stupid whitespace as syntax bullshit and Ruby with its mandatory OO but if I had to choose give me Python any day.

    1. Re:ruby is obnoxious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mandatory OO? Wow a comment from an AC that never actually use Python or Ruby.

    2. Re:ruby is obnoxious by countach74 · · Score: 1

      Is he wrong though? There are no functions in Ruby, are there? Everything has to exist within a class, does it not? Clearly, I am not a Ruby programmer; enlighten me if I'm wrong, please.

    3. Re:ruby is obnoxious by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Informative

      For quick and dirty scripts, you can just define your methods and variables and not deal with classes. They're added to the main object, much like javascript globals and functions are added to the window object.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:ruby is obnoxious by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 2

      No you do not need to place a function in a class.

      irb
      2.0.0-p353 :001 > def add5(x)
      2.0.0-p353 :002?> x + 5;
      2.0.0-p353 :003 > end
      => nil
      2.0.0-p353 :004 > add5(10)
      => 15
      2.0.0-p353 :005 > add5(12)
      => 17

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    5. Re:ruby is obnoxious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The beauty of Ruby is that you can write in it as if it were not OO. Under the covers, it's all OO though.

    6. Re:ruby is obnoxious by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      You're wrong. While it's true that "everything is an object" in Ruby, a lot of it is implicit. E.g. you can define "global" functions - they just end up as methods of Object. And because Object is a base class of any other class, you can call those methods directly in any piece of code. So it's OO, but you can completely ignore it if you want.

      "Everything is an object" in Python, too, by the way. Global functions there become methods on the module object for the module in which they are declared.

      All in all, this just means that the type system is simplified (no separation into primitives and objects etc).

    7. Re:ruby is obnoxious by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      Well, you're not quite correct. When you run irb you're in an Object singleton class:

      irb
      irb(main):001:0> self.class
      => Object
      irb(main):002:0> def add5(x)
      irb(main):003:1> x + 5
      irb(main):004:1> end
      irb(main):005:0> method(:add5)
      => #

      You don't need to know about the object, but it is there.

    8. Re:ruby is obnoxious by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

      I bet some ugly, ugly things get built with it. Gives me chills.

    9. Re:ruby is obnoxious by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      I've written many Ruby scripts and not a single one of them defines a class. Regardless, even if I had to, that hardly makes it OO. Actually most code that people call OO isn't even remotely close to OO. It's just code that has classes with the standard 3-tier separation.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    10. Re:ruby is obnoxious by hazah · · Score: 1

      This is moot. The effect is the same. Or are you complaining about the implementation details you don't actually have to deal with?

    11. Re:ruby is obnoxious by hazah · · Score: 1

      If you can build ugly, then you can build beautiful. Do not fear.

    12. Re:ruby is obnoxious by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      I'm not complaining. The original question was "Everything has to exist within a class, does it not?". It may be moot, but it is interesting to know what is going on.

    13. Re:ruby is obnoxious by hazah · · Score: 1

      The original question implies that you have to wrap everything withing a class Foo ... end construct, which is false.

    14. Re:ruby is obnoxious by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Nice troll. So good I'm replying even though I recognize it.

      You are clearly demonstrating an ignorance of Ruby and also of the history of Python. (I'm not enamored of the whitespace indentation, either, but there were justifications [reasons?], and if you use tabs for the leading whitespace and spaces internally, then it's not that bad, but merely takes a bit of dicipline.)

      The real problem with both Python and Ruby is the lack of decent ways of documenting code. That's one thing that Java got right. Ruby tried, but it's default mechanism isn't much better than markup. (YARD is a better alternative.) With Python, fortunately you can use Doxygen. That's not an ideal solution, but it works. Epydoc was much better, but it doesn't understand inheritance in Python3.

      Note that this is a difficult problem that every language needs to come to grips with. C/C++ were fortunate in that they didn't have much competition, so lots of people wrote tools for documenting them. Post Java things are a lot tougher. It would be nice if there were some standard documentation system for all languages, but in order to work it would need to be so flexible that it would be too clumsy to use. Good documentation tools need to understand the language, and know about things like inheritance, private, and whether modification of a parameter within the routine can cause changes outside. So I think that every language is going to continue to need to come to grips with it individually.
      N.B.: I'm talking about creating documentation for programmers, not users. That requires a totally different approach, and is best handled by tools like LibreWriter.

      P.S.: Python's decision to make Sphinx the official documentation tool for the language is one of the most boneheaded things that has been done during the entire development of the language.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    15. Re:ruby is obnoxious by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Technically main isn't a class it's an object. Class implies that a new instance can be generated. An object is an instance of a class.

      In Ruby, functions do not have to be explicitly placed in class definitions. Compare this to Java which requires every function to be placed in a class definition.

      The fact that Ruby places all of its global functions and values within the application object doesn't change anything and does provide some syntactic sugar since the same reference mechanism can be used for the global functions and values as well as user defined object attributes.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    16. Re:ruby is obnoxious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A class is also an object in ruby.

      class MyClass ...

      end

      MyClass is a constant reference to an instance of Class.

  10. yes. by StealthHunter · · Score: 1, Funny

    yes.

  11. not dying in DevOps by thule · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Chef and Puppet are huge in DevOps. It seems Ruby has found its niche.

    1. Re: not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We need something better than bash scripting, and sadly PERL, python, ruby are it.
      I wish they were more tailored for system scripting tasks than app development though. PERL... Can go die in a fire though, I have a lot invested in it, but the syntax is bad for casual users.

    2. Re:not dying in DevOps by z3r0w8 · · Score: 0

      And it's sad that DevOps tools like this are tied to a specific language, Puppet especially. I suppose the engine has to be written in something, and the use of classes I guess lends itself to CM somewhat, but I think the learning curve cost is high. When you start wanting to do complex things with Puppet, it starts to degenerate quickly if you are not careful with the manifests->templates->heira to dereferencing variables in the correct context and yadda, yadda, yadda. Although it's simple to write puppet modules with barely any Ruby knowledge at all, it's dependence on Ruby a steep price of entry. Python's whitespace syntax is just irritating at any level. I thought that shit was left behind in COBOL. And yes, I'm a neckbeard.

      --
      -----
    3. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aside from inertia, and laziness of someone else to come up with something better, is there a reason such things should stay written in ruby?
      if not, then it's probably on the cards to be replaced by something else

    4. Re: not dying in DevOps by rnturn · · Score: 1

      ``but the syntax is bad for casual users''

      I've seen readable Perl and I've seen Perl that looked like regular expressions written while on acid. You don't have to write unintelligible Perl yet that's the kind that seems to get all the attention. Not sure why you think it isn't well suited for doing systems work. It's been doing just fine in that area for me for years.

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    5. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone that has had to fight w/ Chef and Puppet many times, Ruby being the language deployments are written in is the single largest obstacle to wider use anymore.

      Give me something that runs in Lua scripts, or BASH, or even bloody Python or Node.js, all those I interact with quite commonly as a Linux Administrator and have for several years now. But Ruby? Outside of Chef/Puppet, (where you're dealing with the single most critical piece of infrastructure in existence, your automated deployment system) I've never had to touch Ruby in over a decade now.

    6. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's huge but if you've ever used it you're thinking constantly "what a huge fucking mess this is". Seriously, plain debian is MUCH better then chef/puppet. The only thing they have over sane packaging systems is that they work on more then a subset of operating systems which frankly 99% of people don't need if you're rolling out from 10-100+ web/database/whatever servers to handle load.

    7. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is promising alternative in Python - Ansible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansible_(software)). Who knows what solution will be more popular over time. Python is more common language for system related scripts (like in Debian).

    8. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at how fast saltstack is growing, and that's using python. One of the big reasons against chef or puppet at my work is *because* they are based on ruby.

    9. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF, people actually want skilled Chef programmers? http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/chef.html

      I've written a couple toy programs in Chef. The language would be much better if you could output more than one message per program. It take's Unix's "one tool one job" a bit too far.

    10. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Add Logstash, Kibana, and Capistrano to your list as well.

      I program in Ruby for DevOps almost exclusively for those reasons as well.

    11. Re: not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saltstack and ansible, my friend...never touch chef/puppet again!

    12. Re:not dying in DevOps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erlang!

  12. Contributions also slow down with maturity by stox · · Score: 2

    Now people can spend much more time actually writing applications than writing supporting infrastructure.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    1. Re:Contributions also slow down with maturity by Xtifr · · Score: 2

      I think that's as bad of an oversimplification as the original thesis. But it certainly raises an important issue the submitter seems to be ignoring. For a highly modularized system, a lack of contributions to particular modules may well simply indicate that those modules are mature and don't need a lot of additional contributions any more. To really get a feel for the health of the overall ecosystem, you have to take a broader view.

  13. But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Funny

    Node.js invents threading/processes and is webscale.

    The best part is once you start coding it you will find yourself with a neat trimmed beard in designer plaid in a hip coffee shop listening to music not even out yet with 2 georgous ladies by your side giggling and being turned on by your most awesome code that is on your laptop screen.

    1. Re:But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by sideslash · · Score: 1

      with 2 georgous ladies

      Does that mean two "ladies" both named "george" who are presumed to be into cross dressing? No, thanks.

    2. Re:But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But it's web scale.

      The event/callback/state machine model is a pain to program in, but at least you don't have race conditions on shared data. Also, now that most Javascript programmers are aware that the language supports closures, callbacks aren't so hard to code properly.

      The classic problem with threads is that the usual locking primitives (which are almost always variants on the POSIX primitives) are treated as an OS object, rather than part of the language. For most languages, the language has no idea of which locks lock what data. Ada gets this right, but the Ada rendezvous is clunky. Even Go gets this wrong. (See the endless discussions of "is this a race condition?" in the Go newsgroup.) So race conditions are common in threaded software, and a cause of random failures.

      Practical problems with threads include crappy implementations of lock primitives that make a system call even in the non-blocking case, the cost of fencing on superscalar CPUs, and poor scheduler coordination between context switching and message passing.

      Most of those issues are way too theoretical for the average web programmer. It's better that they not have to think about them. There's a lot of web code to be written and we don't want to waste the good people on it.

    3. Re:But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      But it's web scale.

      The event/callback/state machine model is a pain to program in, but at least you don't have race conditions on shared data. Also, now that most Javascript programmers are aware that the language supports closures, callbacks aren't so hard to code properly.

      The classic problem with threads is that the usual locking primitives (which are almost always variants on the POSIX primitives) are treated as an OS object, rather than part of the language. For most languages, the language has no idea of which locks lock what data. Ada gets this right, but the Ada rendezvous is clunky. Even Go gets this wrong. (See the endless discussions of "is this a race condition?" in the Go newsgroup.) So race conditions are common in threaded software, and a cause of random failures.

      Practical problems with threads include crappy implementations of lock primitives that make a system call even in the non-blocking case, the cost of fencing on superscalar CPUs, and poor scheduler coordination between context switching and message passing.

      Most of those issues are way too theoretical for the average web programmer. It's better that they not have to think about them. There's a lot of web code to be written and we don't want to waste the good people on it.

      But in essence you are re-inventing the operating system hence the joke. Like Java and C# wouldn't it be better to have an api or framework do this for you rather than you trying to outdo the OS in this regard? Java is overly engineered and frustrating but everything scales up easily for non SMP experts in the swing library.

      I have not programmed in Ruby yet but I was under the impression that has apis that can do this so the programmer does not have to write his or her own event timer events and other non sense.

    4. Re:But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The event/callback/state machine model is a pain to program in

      Only for the lack of syntactic sugar for continuations, which is coming to ES6 (indeed, it's already in node.js beta, if you run your code with --harmony).

    5. Re:But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I'm a hetro female. What would I want a beard or ladies giggling by my side for?

    6. Re:But Node.JS IS WEBSCALE by c++ · · Score: 1

      The event/callback/state machine model is a pain to program in, but at least you don't have race conditions on shared data.

      Tell this to the patients that were killed by the Therac-25. It had a race condition even though it was an event-based system that didn't use true threads.

  14. Nope (title capitalization sucks, btw) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. Next question, is Slashdot dying?

    1. Re:Nope (title capitalization sucks, btw) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      No. Next question, is Slashdot dying?

      Slashdot will be dead as soon as the new "design" comes out.

    2. Re:Nope (title capitalization sucks, btw) by PNutts · · Score: 1

      No. Next question, is Slashdot dying?

      Slashdot was reported as dying back in 2011.

    3. Re:Nope (title capitalization sucks, btw) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was already misreported as one of the best tech sites.
       
      Aside from being able to mouth off about whatever there really hasn't been any hard tech on Slashdot for over a decade.

    4. Re:Nope (title capitalization sucks, btw) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they were right.

      That's why I haven't logged in in more than 2 years.

    5. Re:Nope (title capitalization sucks, btw) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Today's slashdot has nothing to do with old slashdot.

  15. Ruby will never die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will live on in our hearts and in our memories.

  16. Dying? No. by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

    Ruby as a language is progressing well and Ruby 2.1 will be out soon.

    Ruby gems is still active.

    Just because it's not getting all the buzz from the young kids doesn't mean it's dying.

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    1. Re:Dying? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the problem with these scripting language flavor of the months, everyone thinks their pet language is going to be THE language going forward and only once they turn 30 do they realized they wasted their young years on a piece of shit fad language instead of just using C++ like a man.

    2. Re:Dying? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Dying? No. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      Just because it's not getting all the buzz from the young kids doesn't mean it's dying.

      Ruby is not C. Ruby was born amidst a slew of toy languages, getting all the buzz from the young kids. Once that buzz died down, and the kids moved on to newer fad languages, and without a generation of seasoned programmers extolling its virtues, Ruby died.

      Ruby isn't dying. It's already dead.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    4. Re:Dying? No. by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I view Ruby as Perl evolved. There is a need for scripting languages and both Ruby and Python do a good job filling that niche.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    5. Re:Dying? No. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 2

      See, that's the thing. Perl isn't dead. Perl is still used extensively in system administration and for quick prototyping and proof-of-concept work. Python is still alive and well in the sciences as a supplement to MatLab and other similar tools. Perl and Python have both just about vanished from the web, though, as other server-side scripting tools have become more prevalent. This same tide that displaced Perl and Python from their traditional stomping grounds has also displaced Ruby. However, Perl and Python have found other niches where they thrive. Can the same really be said of Ruby?

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    6. Re:Dying? No. by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Perl is still used in sysadmin, however Ruby is gaining ground at Perl's expense in this area.

      Python is being used in science by the new post docs, but fortran, matlab, and IDL still reign supreme. (I like python because it's way cheaper than IDL or Matlab). Perl actually has a larger share of science use than Python. Python is replacing Perl as a glue language for science with Fortran and C still do the heavy lifting.

      Ruby is also being used in science. Ruby + R when plotting is required, otherwise Ruby (like Python) is a glue language with Fortran and C do the computationally intensive work.

      Ruby, Python and even Perl are still being used to power the web.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    7. Re:Dying? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Python (2.7) is also the industry standard for scripting in 3D apps like Maya, C4D, etc.

    8. Re:Dying? No. by mellon · · Score: 1

      "It is because of you, motherfucker, that we are not using LISP."

      Win.

    9. Re:Dying? No. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      that's funny, you think your little part of the world is the whole?

      Ruby is quite popular in asia, used in huge projects.

    10. Re:Dying? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

      Metasploit, and Diaspora*. Say what you will of D*, but Metasploit is a pretty crucial tool for most every pentester out there.

      Thriving though? I'm not so sure. But Ruby is still kicking in its own kingdom, however small. And frankly, as a learning tool, I'd argue it has quite a place, as its syntax is particularly easy for those who get held up by the level of abstraction from human language in other languages (once they've gotten the logic from Ruby, they hopefully can of course overcome such issues...baby steps).

      In terms of rapidly occurring new software though, well, that's not something I expect to see from Ruby. It's a bit of a hobbit among programming languages in that regard, I suppose, but generally I'd say Ruby is alive and well in its own place.

    11. Re:Dying? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just as an anecdote, most of the bioinformatics work I'm involved in is done in R (with backend code in C and fortran, sure - but the ratio of library programmers to users is rather uneven). There's a lot of scripting work to be done where it's a perfectly usable language, if you can live with the quirks. I'd rather use something nicer (python or whatever), but whatever makes the biologists happy.

    12. Re:Dying? No. by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1

      Ruby is alive as long as people are willing to program in it. Also, it's very easy to find employment as a ruby programmer. I don't know what you're definition of "dead" is, but ruby certainly fails to meet mine.

      Now, if the popularity were to decline to the point where no one was hiring ruby programmers anymore, then I'd obviously have to learn whatever displaced ruby. I'm going to assume that whatever displaces ruby will be an improvement. So I win either way.

      You're sounding positively curmudgeonly... or maybe I'm not reading you right.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    13. Re:Dying? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ruby was 'born' around the same time as Java.

  17. not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought I saw a job posting that asked for experience with Ruby and/or Ruby on rails. I didn't know that companies use Ruby.

  18. Popularity contest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the popularity of the language is an important talking point when selecting a language and framework for a new project

    Well, there's your problem. Unless your goal is to start a new project which is doomed to become a legacy system based on 'some popular language of the day' that nobody want's to touch when the shiny wears off.

    Next time try selecting a language and framework based on a solid history of doing the job not a popularity contest.

  19. Node.js by thammoud · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We had to swallow a dagger and use JavaScript on the client as it is the only game in town. Please someone, enlighten me, why would I use this horrific language on the server side? What exactly am I missing? What is so great about Node.js that warrants having to deal with JS.

    1. Re:Node.js by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1, Interesting

      While you and I, as programmers, have an innate hatred for JavaScript, you can't overlook the hoards of "web developers" whose only experience writing code entails JavaScript.

      What's great about Node.js is that it doesn't warrant hiring actual programmers.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    2. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is better than Java on the server side?

    3. Re: Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because designers who have free time to write blogs talk about it a lot and because JS on the server makes front end developers suddenly think they are qualified to make back end architecture contributions because now they know a server side language.

    4. Re:Node.js by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      Well, for one, you can have the same single-threading benefits you have in the browser, now on the server! Cooperative multitasking like in the old days! It will make you forget what threads were invented for in the first place!

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    5. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer to your question is hell no. Java is faster and has a large and mature library.

    6. Re:Node.js by countach74 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      JavaScript is rather misunderstood. It does, indeed, have issues--perhaps more than other languages (I'd say certainly more than say, Ruby or Python). But it has merits as well that most people overlook or simply don't know about. It is, for instance, very expressive. Particularly in the server-side programming realm, NodeJS has a few advantages to it that most other languages / frameworks don't (or require more difficulty in implementing), such as:

      1. Naturally asynchronous, NodeJS allows vastly more I/O than a similar threaded solution. Need to implement long polling for 2,000 concurrent users? Not a problem.

      2. The ability to share libraries and other code effortlessly between server-side and client-side applications.

      Some of the down sides to NodeJS are that, well... it uses JavaScript. Seriously, though, it could be worse: it could be PHP. JavaScript really isn't that bad, once you actually learn the language. I hated it until fairly recently because I didn't really understand it. Now that I've spent some time learning its intricacies and quirks, I am much more productive with it. I can even enjoy using it. Would I prefer using Python? Absolutely. But it's really not so bad.

      Moving forward though, I think one of the biggest problem with JavaScript in general is that we have far too many people who know just enough JavaScript to be dangerous that trying to establish high community standards will be very, very hard. In fact, one of the reasons I like Python so much is not that Python itself is all that great (it, too, has issues), but rather that there are countless excellent, well maintained, well designed libraries available. The same is simply not true for JavaScript in general.

    7. Re:Node.js by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      We had to swallow a dagger and use JavaScript on the client as it is the only game in town. Please someone, enlighten me, why would I use this horrific language on the server side? What exactly am I missing? What is so great about Node.js that warrants having to deal with JS.

      Because web developers think they invented threading. They like node.js because they can do block/non block I/O and asynchronize programing and can write something hip called events to manage them with a new technology called a scheduler.

    8. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      God I hate conceited "programmers" like you. There are tens of thousands "programmers", not just "developers", who love and use the Javascript language. Just because you personally don't like JS doesn't mean you can just dismiss the language and everyone who *programs* in it as "developers".

    9. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is, for instance, very expressive.

      Expressive as function(function(function(function())), sure.

    10. Re:Node.js by davidbrit2 · · Score: 1

      I assume that when you say "writing code", you mean, "cobbling together cargo cult code snippets invoking jquery/prototype that were harvested from the first Stack Overflow result that Google crapped out." Your version is definitely more concise, though.

    11. Re:Node.js by gbjbaanb · · Score: 0

      but we can, come back when you know something else - preferably 2 or 3 other things. Then you'll know how narrow the design of js really is, just like the rest of us. Using it for everything just isn't the best idea.

    12. Re:Node.js by Johnny00 · · Score: 0

      Because I can use one language, one uniform representation of an object from database (mongo) through the app server, web server , session store and client-side. I can have robust coding and debugging tools thanks to advanced IDEs like WebStorm7. I can leverage a common pool of engineers to do both front-end and back-end work - sure, the front-end types need to cross train with the back-ends and vice versa - but its MUCH more feasible when everyone is speaking a common language.

      --
      I live life on the edge ... of my desk.
    13. Re:Node.js by tibman · · Score: 1

      lol, like you don't do that for C#? The language does not make the programmer.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    14. Re:Node.js by GrunthosThePoet · · Score: 1

      Its all some people know. When all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail

    15. Re:Node.js by radish · · Score: 1

      Naturally asynchronous, NodeJS allows vastly more I/O than a similar threaded solution. Need to implement long polling for 2,000 concurrent users? Not a problem

      And it's not a problem in any other decent server side language either. Async/Completion Ports for .NET, NIO/Mina/Grizzly/etc for Java.

      The ability to share libraries and other code effortlessly between server-side and client-side applications

      I'm struggling to understand why you'd ever want this (assuming a web application, which is a fair assumption as you're talking about JS). Your business logic lives on the server, your presentation logic on the client - and never the twain shall meet. The only thing I can really think about is data type definitions, but JSON does a good job of simplifying that (and something like GSON will deal with the conversions). Now I have wanted to share code between server and client in a rich client application, but in that case I could build both sides in either .NET or Java and be perfectly happy.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    16. Re:Node.js by geekoid · · Score: 1

      so was Jack the ripper, that didn't mean he was a horrible person who can only be sated with the blood of a prostitute. When referring to Ruby, I would say web master instead of a prostitute, but then I'd be repeating myself.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    17. Re: Node.js by tibman · · Score: 1

      You paint with a very wide brush. Front-end development is still relatively new. Anyone who has been developing for a decade IS a back-end developer. If you have been keeping with the times then it means you started doing more and more front-end work (aka Javascript). Now there is so much on the front-end that it actually has to be organized properly and cared for. Javascript is no longer just a copy & paste language. Bad developers write bad code. The language is immaterial.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    18. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Argh yuck, get off your high horse.. I smell a Java or .Net programmer.

      As someone who had to develop in assembly because no decent HL compilers existed in my environment (yes I'm that old) then moved on to Pascal, then "back" to C, before living far too long in bloated "enterprise" world of Java before finally coming back to love computer science because I discovered Python, I think I'm in a position to know how "narrow the design of js really is...".

      JavaScript IS NOT a horrible language. It's not as pretty and fluffy like Ruby or Java/C# when it comes to protecting you from shooting yourself in the foot, it does have few things ass backwards but a good programmer goes gracefully around those. What is important is that it's certainly expressive enough for web development, and Node.js makes for some really fast web servers without the need for black magick, and will not eat 2 gigs of RAM just to blurp from a template.

    19. Re:Node.js by countach74 · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, more like: http://pastie.org/private/ij3rdcgtkgteefgwj57mfg

      I realize that's just an example of simple inheritance, but not bad for using nothing more than functions and prototypes. Yes, it's a little verbose. You can also do prototypal inheritance, etc. The point is that with just a couple of constructs, JavaScript can do things that most languages must separate into many more statements, expressions, etc. But to clarify, I am *not* saying JavaScript is awesome; it clearly has limitations. But it is pretty amazing what all can be done with such a simple language. It is misunderstood.

    20. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In which parallel universe is Java faster in anything but synthetic benchmarks made to make Java look fast? On which of it's myriad "written in Java" application servers is it faster cause it sure ain't JBoss (os sorry it's SupaFly now), Tomcat, GlassFish nor Jetty? Which of it's myriad bloated, 16-layers-of-shit-just-to-grab-few-records frameworks are you using to make it faster than Node cause it sure aint Spring and it definitely aint friggin EJB3? What exactly were you trying to solve when you measured and realized it was faster than Node?

    21. Re:Node.js by countach74 · · Score: 2

      And it's not a problem in any other decent server side language either. Async/Completion Ports for .NET, NIO/Mina/Grizzly/etc for Java.

      But it is in Ruby, to my knowledge. And many other higher-level languages.

      I'm struggling to understand why you'd ever want this (assuming a web application, which is a fair assumption as you're talking about JS). Your business logic lives on the server, your presentation logic on the client - and never the twain shall meet. The only thing I can really think about is data type definitions, but JSON does a good job of simplifying that (and something like GSON will deal with the conversions). Now I have wanted to share code between server and client in a rich client application, but in that case I could build both sides in either .NET or Java and be perfectly happy.

      Yeah I'm mostly thinking pseudo classes and things like that. Say, a custom date/time library, etc.

    22. Re:Node.js by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      NodeJS has a few advantages to it that most other languages / frameworks don't (or require more difficulty in implementing), such as:
      1. Naturally asynchronous, NodeJS allows vastly more I/O than a similar threaded solution. Need to implement long polling for 2,000 concurrent users? Not a problem

      If you compare what it takes to write async code in node.js to, say, ASP.NET MVC (thanks to async/await syntactic sugar in C#!), it's definitely not in favor of JS.

      In fact, one of the reasons I like Python so much is not that Python itself is all that great (it, too, has issues), but rather that there are countless excellent, well maintained, well designed libraries available. The same is simply not true for JavaScript in general.

      The other problem is that community itself seems to have a very low standard for libraries. When you look at some of the code from npm packages, it's really every bit as bad as the classic PHP horrors. And yet they're saying that it's a good thing, somehow, because it "does the job" etc.

    23. Re:Node.js by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      That, sir, is encapsulation, not inheritence

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    24. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Long polling for 2,000 concurrent users? Trying streaming real-time multimedia to 5,000 concurrent users using a single process, no threads, and with each stream customized for each user on-the-fly by splicing in announcements and advertisements. And I wasn't even aiming for performance. I stopped at 5,000 because it was about as high as I could go without the network being saturated. My user CPU time was less than 40%, with the majority of the time spent in the kernel dealing with TCP. After looking at my numbers I figure I could saturate a 10Gb link with a week's worth of effort--run a couple more event loops in separate threads and tweak the network stack with IRQ pinning or some other hack. And that's before I bother looking for bottlenecks and optimizing my code. I know I do way too many needless memory copies.

      Although, I should say I use straight-up C with a smattering of Lua for, e.g., handling the logic of advertisement selection, which is ugly and has lots of code churn.

      I've been doing asynchronous programming in C and other languages for well over 10 years, before libevent event existed. Today's processors are so ridiculously fast that a Perl script would easily handle long polling for 2,000 concurrent users without breaking a sweat. Do long polling for 20,000 connections on Node, with a significant fraction of those active at any one time, and then you'll have something to be mildly proud of.

      If you need to do any amount of heavy lifting, you have to use C. For everything else, almost any scripting language will do. I don't like C++ because people tend to go nuts with Boost and other bloatware and end up with performance not much better than something like Node or Lua. Same thing for Java.

      At the end of the day, CPU performance allows scripting languages to look like highly optimized C applications 10 year prior. Frequency isn't getting faster, but caches are growing, which is often more important, anyhow. But if you want to maximize performance today for today's hardware, you still have to go back to the old tools.

    25. Re:Node.js by countach74 · · Score: 1

      If you compare what it takes to write async code in node.js to, say, ASP.NET MVC (thanks to async/await syntactic sugar in C#!), it's definitely not in favor of JS.

      I'll have to take your word for it.

      The other problem is that community itself seems to have a very low standard for libraries. When you look at some of the code from npm packages, it's really every bit as bad as the classic PHP horrors. And yet they're saying that it's a good thing, somehow, because it "does the job" etc.

      Right. One of my complaints about Node in specific and JavaScript in general.

    26. Re:Node.js by countach74 · · Score: 2

      There was an example of both. I threw in encapsulation as an after thought to show how it can be done in JavaScript without any special syntax.

    27. Re:Node.js by countach74 · · Score: 1

      I should probably clarify I don't use Node for anything in production. My understanding is it can handle up to 5,000 concurrent async connections; I said 2,000 to be safe, because I personally haven't done any bench marking. Also, most of your argument, while entirely true, isn't very applicable. I've never said JavaScript is anywhere near the performance of C. I imagine if it were, Google wouldn't be working on Native Client. My point was only that JavaScript's asynchronous nature makes such things second nature with no additional thought to it. All of the applicable libraries are written asynchronously as well, which is one of the things that isn't so straight forwards in other high level languages like Python. But yes I do agree with what you said.

    28. Re:Node.js by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I'll have to take your word for it.

      You don't have to. The same feature is slated for ES6, and, in fact, you can already use it it Node. The code snippets should be pretty much self explanatory.

    29. Re:Node.js by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      While you and I, as programmers, have an innate hatred for JavaScript, you can't overlook the hoards of "web developers" whose only experience writing code entails JavaScript

      Most of which seems to consist of making Lists of Things in json for backend libraries to chew through.

    30. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm struggling to understand why you'd ever want this (assuming a web application, which is a fair assumption as you're talking about JS). Your business logic lives on the server, your presentation logic on the client - and never the twain shall meet.

      well think of it in a mainframe kind of way instead

      you build a small little snippet of javascript that reads in data from a large source and start processing at the mainframe service site in your browser
      you find results gradually come through but your bandwidth is limited as well as your processing power
      you click to send your snippet to their "cloud" in the form of massive javascript processing cluster
      the mainframe service website essentially worked as an inital testbed to ensure it isn't "attacking" the cluster, nor pushing anything malicious
      so as it's given the okay in the client side browser testbed, once uploaded the cluster spins up nodes to process your snippet
      instead of a trickle your work now feedbacks back as a river
      as the data comes in, you notice a slight bug in the form of the wrong magnitude being used
      you send a kill signal as you correct "10000" back to "1000" in your snippet, then re-send it for processing
      once again the cluster starts streaming back results
      once done you're charged a fee for the processing time and bandwidth used
      you save your snippet & results, close your browser

      there's obviously the problem on exactly "where" the cluster is supposed to figure out where it can split the processing across multiple nodes
      the exact same thing happens in any compiled langauge though
      there difference here is when there's a mistake, at least the turn around to get it back up and running is quite low
      it won't hit high marks for performance, but if you don't have anything else productive to do while waiting the extra time a compiled would have saved, then it's likely you're not going to be around too long anyway

      i am far from saying javascript is a be all and end all solution
      but what i am seeing is that sometimes using the same language serverside and client side can be useful
      in the case of javascript, as these days it's compiled (quite quickly) and run in a vm, the turn-around in development time can be quiet fast
      there is absolutely no case for it yet in HFT or other scientific data crunching that works in the scales of days / weeks / months
      but if for shits and giggles i wanted to track sub 100k slashdot id's for their comment activeness and post frequency, i could write a script for it in my browser with a explicit kill after it's done 3 to 5 stories. i can then remove the kill switch, send the exact same code to my server, set it to run, close up the laptop and go do something else. i'd just check-in every now and then to see how it's going. no issues with compiling funny on my laptop vs the server. it's just my server would have a lot more processing power and bandwidth to handle the data load it's going to be sucking in

    31. Re:Node.js by samantha · · Score: 1

      Any language describe as "not that bad" is not a language I am keen to use any more than I have to. Programming asynchronously as your predominate mode is not remotely natural. We should not be inflicting that kind of deep impedance mismatch on ourselves. If Ruby has attracted to many amateurs or hype then what of node.js and the misplaced web client programmers that think that using code with the restriction required by the client on the server is actually a good thing.

    32. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why I write VHDL, it is a language that has been out since the 1980s. No compiler yet has implemented VHDL2008, most compilers in the last few years finally are able to compile VHDL1993. It is an incredible complicated language which is programmed by people who aren't programmers.

      Luckily there is also hardly any communication between people programming in it. There is almost no standard library (only one that defines the most basic types; a 7 state boolean, an array of those booleans, and signed and unsigned mathematical operations on those boolean arrays). No one makes libraries or shares pieces of code.

    33. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except NodeJS doesn't perform that well and there are other non-blocking frameworks performing a lot better:

      http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r8&hw=i7

    34. Re:Node.js by dkf · · Score: 1

      But [async IO] is [still a problem] in Ruby, to my knowledge. And many other higher-level languages.

      And to others, what node.js does still counts as "babby's first async system".

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    35. Re:Node.js by Maudib · · Score: 1

      Total bullshit. Javascript/Node is just fine for some projects.

      Look, I code in and love Scala primarily these days due to my projects requirements. Static typing, functional, oo and compiled, its great for many "serious" applications. That said, for the 50% of web applications where time to market, and not maintainability or performance is most important, Node.js is better. I fail to see how "real" programmers could have any problem coding in Node. Its dead fucking simple.

    36. Re:Node.js by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      na, I'm a C++ dev really.. though in today's job market, I'm a bit of whatever the client needs guy.. though fortunately not java.

      I say the same things to those guys too though - mainly because they too think that their favourite language is the only that should be used *everywhere*. I think this is the problem with javascript - its ideal place is in the browser, not writing servers.

    37. Re:Node.js by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why exactly do you find JS "horrific"? It's a very nice language, certainly it has a couple of quirks, like any other language does, but on the whole it's quite lovely. IF YOU USE IT PROPERLY

      Don't approach it like a class driven language, it's not one. If you can't understand the shear innate godliness that is on-the-fly prototype modification, and first order functions, then Javascript is not for you.

    38. Re:Node.js by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how "real" programmers could have any problem coding in Node. Its dead fucking simple.

      Indeed, that's my point. However, I don't believe the converse is true. That is, while any real programmer should be able to easily pick up Node.js/javascript, I don't think it's quite as likely that someone with only a Node.js background will be too successful coding in a real language like C.

      Based on my anecdotal and entirely subjective experience, someone that codes C is more likely to be a good coder than someone that codes Javascript.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  20. It is... by mha · · Score: 1

    (i.e. Slashdot is) - as far as content and quality are concerned. Look at my UID, I've known the site since the beginning. These days I don't really know why I still come here, reddit has MUCH better comment quality on average (not a joke - this includes that the really good comments are easy to spot while the garbage quickly disappears). Slashdot is living off of past glory completely. Back then the moderation system was state the greatest asset - today it's still the same while everyone else continued to develop. I'm not bitter at all - as I said, reddit is pretty good so I know what I read most of the time...

    1. Re:It is... by RDW · · Score: 2

      You're the guy who told me to get off his lawn when I first joined, aren't you?

    2. Re:It is... by OptimalCynic · · Score: 1

      Couldn't agree more. You can have a conversation on reddit too, not so easy on slashdot.

    3. Re:It is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the tip. I wasn't a goose stepper so I lost my mod points and now this place has just become a flamefeast for the most part. It's time to move on.

    4. Re:It is... by mha · · Score: 1

      I'm under the impression - supported by the votes on your comment - most people would very much prefer to see YOU leave. That would raise quality here quite a bit. But kudos for not posting as AC - On the other hand, what does it mean you are unable to recognize how you behave?

    5. Re:It is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a long time slashdot reader, I would love to know some reddit equivalents to when I started reading slashdot in 1997. Any recommendations?

  21. Obligatory: She's dead, Jim. by PNutts · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a developer in a dynamic, reflective, object-oriented, general-purpose programming language that supports multiple programming paradigms, including functional, object oriented, and imperative.

    Thank you, Wikipedia.

    1. Re:Obligatory: She's dead, Jim. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, I see we should have asked you about Mozart/Oz.

  22. Re:Node.js? Dude, that was so last year by PNutts · · Score: 1

    The cool kids are using Go for their server apps and infrastructure projects.

    While their parents are taking real jobs and paying the bills!

    Sadly, those kids are hired and keep chasing the latest and greatest (including jobs) and leave their one trick pony app behind that was written in "the next big thing" language with no knowledge transfer or support.

  23. Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Those of us in industry are very fed up with Ruby and Ruby on Rails, but I think it's much more because of their communities than it is because of the technologies themselves.

    I don't know if there's a polite way of saying this, but far too many of the people involved with those communities are utter disasters who in turn create utterly disastrous software systems. For every Ruby success story we may hear about, there are probably 10 or 20 total disasters that aren't as widely known. The disasters are usually because of the people involved, not the technologies.

    Those of us who've been in the industry for many years, if not decades, and have had to engage in hiring over the past 8 or so years will know what I'm talking about. We have to deal with candidates who have no formal education at all in computer science, software engineering, or a related field. They don't even have the equivalent of a single four-month community college programming course. If we're lucky, they've read a single book about web development using Ruby on Rails. (This is ignoring their other serious flaws, such as the complete inability to dress or act with even a minimal level of professionalism; I've interviewed some of these hipsters while they're wearing t-shirts with dumbass sayings on them, and fedora hats.)

    Now, having been in the industry for years, I can see right through these people. When they get past HR, they don't get past me. But I can't be everywhere. I've worked with a few organizations lately where the people making the hiring or purchasing decisions in the past didn't know better, and now these organizations have ended up with their very own Ruby on Rails disasters.

    The Ruby community may not realize it, but they're getting a very bad reputation in the industry. It's nearly as bad as the reputation that the PHP and JavaScript communities have now. But this is exactly what's expected to happen when dealing with programmers who do shitty work in the first place, or who think it's perfectly normal to write unmaintainable code, or who think it's acceptable to job hop 3 or 4 times a year, or who can't work in a professional manner, or who deliver one under-performing and costly software disaster after another.

    At more and more places, "Ruby" and "Ruby on Rails" are becoming synonyms for "costly disaster". That's not the kind of reputation that a programming language or a web framework can have if it wants to survive and flourish past the short term. Maybe the people in these communities don't realize it, but they're losing trust at an alarming pace.

    1. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      I don't think this has anything to do with Ruby itself. Although I've seen plenty of issues, Rails is engineered well enough, and in the right hands it does the job. What you're saying is that there are far too many programmers who can't program, and they tend to gravitate to languages where you get up and running very fast - Ruby, PHP, Javascript (although I've met them in all walks).

      I would agree. I've interviewed many programmers with years of experience who can't a) read a pseudo code program and run it in their head and b) write out the simplest of problems without reference to the Internet. "Team leader at their last project? Steer clear", but I'm not always listened to.

      I don't think Ruby is dying though, quite the opposite. I think it is becoming boring, and better for it. Startups have been taken over, Rails applications are now in the enterprise running surprising applications.

    2. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never not hired someone because they wore a particular shirt.

    3. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've also been in the industry a number of years, and most of the "utterly disastrous software systems" I've seen are from the Java community. In fact, most of the "Enterprise" rails systems I've seen were built on the wreckage of some Java cluster-fuck.

    4. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those people have mostly moved on to node.js and Clojure now. Next year they'll probably move to Dart or whatever the next fad language is. It's amusing that you can avoid most of these people simply by using a statically typed language.

    5. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When talking about Ruby and Rails, please try to separate Ruby from Rails.

      Ruby is a gem of a language, which provides simplicity, coherency and expressiveness that is rare to find among imperative languages. Granted, Ruby is a prototyping language, meaning you should NEVER EVER use it for production without all features and dependencies being covered by unit and integration tests. So it's more a tool to explore new ideas and options quickly, than something you can trust right after compile-time. With extensive automatic testing though, Ruby definately IS useful for production too. Being intepreted though, it's not very fast or optimized, if raw speed is what is required.

      Rails on the other hand, is just shitty. Instead of simplicity, coherency and expressiveness, Rails just starts abusing every little feature in Ruby, invocing a horrible spaghetti monster of instantiated objects, with default options, assumptions and similar configurations spread all over the plate. Having worked with Rails and people who buy into the idea, my advice is just: Never ever go there. Granted, ActiveObject is a neat idea, usable and can make one senior developer do the work of many people and keep things simple. But that's it. Everything else about Rails is just shortcut upon shortcut, with no coherent idea about how this will be supported, maintained, upgraded and tuned.

      Such shortcuts may seem tempting for a single developer, who has everything in his head. But when involving A TEAM, such shortcuts just undercuts everything you're trying to build in a team: The same vision, the same specification, the same design, effective and error-free maintainability, etc. Rails just cannot function as an axle to drive software development through, when there's the need to involve more than a couple of people. Rails doesn't even function for one developer, when that very same developer forgets the whole structure of assumptions involved in the creation of her spaghetti monster, or when upgrades to Rails break those unasserted assumptions.

      Ruby on the other hand, is a very interesting language. Not perfect, but it's a joy to do hobby projects on. Combined with ActiveObject, you can really do alot what was previously just too tedious and elaborate for a one man project. Also, there's nothing in ActiveObject that excludes other people from understanding what's going on. Whenever and wherever you use Perl, you can indeed use Ruby. For maintainability though, Python may be the better option (I never got into Python much, but from a maintainability perspective it does make alot of sense).

    6. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Those of us in industry are very fed up with Ruby and Ruby on Rails, but I think it's much more because of their communities than it is because of the technologies themselves.

      One of these here. I'm on this "industry" since 25 years ago (even more, if you count teenager's jobs for peanuts).

      I'm already got more than I wanted from RoR (but I like Ruby, the Language, very much!), PHP and the vast majority of 'web technologies" we have now.

      I don't know if there's a polite way of saying this, but far too many of the people involved with those communities are utter disasters who in turn create utterly disastrous software systems. For every Ruby success story we may hear about, there are probably 10 or 20 total disasters that aren't as widely known. The disasters are usually because of the people involved, not the technologies.

      I think the worst problem with our "industry", currently, it's exactly this: "politeness".

      We're in a engineering area, damnit! The darn thing works or does not, and if it doesn't, sack it and replace it with something that does, for Fuck's sake!!

      However, we must deal with children that goes crying to papa (the manager) how mean we're by hurting their feelings pinpointing their bad, useless or simply plain wrong code!!!!!! (perfectly indented, following every single code standard known by man - and yet, bad, useless or simply plain wrong).

      Those of us who've been in the industry for many years, if not decades, and have had to engage in hiring over the past 8 or so years will know what I'm talking about. We have to deal with candidates who have no formal education at all in computer science, software engineering, or a related field. They don't even have the equivalent of a single four-month community college programming course. If we're lucky, they've read a single book about web development using Ruby on Rails.

      Lack of formal education is a problem, mas frankly, not the worst. The worst son-of-a-bitches I had the questionable pleasure to work with were Masters on something - most of them, utterly dumbasses that can write a Mastering Tesis, but not a single line of code.

      Not that all dumbasses have formal education - the problem is not the formal education, but the dumb asses!

      We need to learn how to correctly identify dumb asses, have them formal education or not.

      (This is ignoring their other serious flaws, such as the complete inability to dress or act with even a minimal level of professionalism; I've interviewed some of these hipsters while they're wearing t-shirts with dumbass sayings on them, and fedora hats.)

      Huge mistake. You're promoting input, not output.

      The guy that's wearing a T-Shirt just don't care about your personal standards. He knows (or think it knows) he know how to deliver a job, and he thinks that's what's matter. And I agree with them.

      The worst dumb ass of all if the one that prefer to hire another dumb ass that's correctly dressed, than a good professional that deliver correctly good code.

      You need to hire good coders, not good actors/actresses. Software is not a movie.

      Now, having been in the industry for years, I can see right through these people. When they get past HR, they don't get past me. But I can't be everywhere. I've worked with a few organizations lately where the people making the hiring or purchasing decisions in the past didn't know better, and now these organizations have ended up with their very own Ruby on Rails disasters.

      And then all you managed to do is prevent RoR disasters, but not the disasters themselves.

      Again, the worst dumb assess I know (of maintain code) wear suits or any other kind of "professionally correct dressings".

      (and I like fedora hats, by thr way - but wouldn't use them on the office - it's too hot when it's hot, and too cold when it's cold!).

      The Ruby comm

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    7. Re:Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby. by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1

      I started ruby (and rails) in 2008. I really, really loved the community around it. Back then, very, very few programmers were into ruby, since there really weren't any jobs out there. Of course, there were a lot of php programmers who adopted rails because it was so much better than php, and they often wrote awful code. But by and large most rubyists were the kind of people you wanted to work with because they made you a better programmer.

      To me, the big shift that turned the community into a giant wasteland was things like CodeAcademy -- the idea that rails (and therefore ruby) would be a great platform for people who want to learn to program for the first time. Then you suddenly just started seeing codebases pop up all over the place written by very inexperienced programmers with no clue what they were doing, or any experience with software design in general.

      I really, really love ruby, but I often grow tired of the community around it. I take issue with your final paragraph -- there are a ton of great ruby (and even rails) codebases out there. Your personal experiences may be artificially depressing your opinion.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
  24. Short answer: yes. by hessian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trends always die.

    All-purpose languages that adapt over time are better tools to learn.

    You learn more in depth, instead of having certain tasks be very easy.

    This is similar to the trade off between wizard-based interfaces and actually knowing what you're doing with an operating system.

    1. Re:Short answer: yes. by xtal · · Score: 2

      It amazes me the utility and run I've gotten out of learning C and C++.. decades go.

      --
      ..don't panic
  25. Finally got it by gentryx · · Score: 0

    You're close. Both ways. Funny. 32, not 35. ^^

    --
    Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    1. Re:Finally got it by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 0

      Now I'm just curious about age-to-UID mapping - I'm just about to hit 36.

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    2. Re:Finally got it by rk · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hmmm. 46 here. And apparently still too fast for Slashdot who tells me to "Slow down, cowboy!"

    3. Re:Finally got it by Shinobi · · Score: 1

      I'm 35 since a couple of months back

    4. Re:Finally got it by mellon · · Score: 1

      I'm so old I used to program a computer with core memory. 64kx16 of core memory. FWIW, Node isn't better than Ruby, but it is in some sense more convenient, in that you only need to be immediately fluent in one programming language. But if I had my druthers, I'd go back to using scheme, just like we used to back in the days of the Old Republic. There's just no point in bragging about the programming language you're using if it's got two different ways of ending a sentence.

    5. Re:Finally got it by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      I'm 53 - but was relatively late to the party (and I've tended to have younger coworkers, one of whom introduced me to /. a decade or so ago).

      I suspect any age to UID correlation has a pretty large sigma. I wouldn't be surprised if the four and five digit UIDs demonstrate a big cluster of people who are now between 30 and 40, though.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re:Finally got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn bro, me too, we've grown old! the first dotcom bubble feels like it was just yesterday! i remember back in 1999 thinking i was hot shit compared to all these old dads from the 80s reminiscing about old shit i'd never used...now i am them!

    7. Re:Finally got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I imagine there is a better correlation between smaller UID and longer time reading /. For UID groups that correspond to longer times on /., there is a minimum age that could conceivably be in that group.

    8. Re:Finally got it by fnj · · Score: 1

      You had 64k? "Mine" was an HP2100 with 16k. Assembler, Fortran, HP Basic, and Algol. Oh, plus machine language counting the times I had to reload the program loader by toggling switches in octal. I still remember the HALT 102077. Great times.

    9. Re:Finally got it by mellon · · Score: 1

      PDP 11/45. We had Basic Plus and TECO. It was pretty dire.

    10. Re:Finally got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You kids with your fancy PDP 11/45s. All I had was a PDP 8. With DECtape.

    11. Re:Finally got it by mellon · · Score: 1

      Ha! We had two RK05s and an RM05!

    12. Re:Finally got it by murdocj · · Score: 1

      I used to program a CDC machine that had "fast core" and extended "slow core" memory. Not to mention figuring out how to get your loop into 7 instructions so it fit into cache.

    13. Re: Finally got it by alta · · Score: 1

      I'm 37...

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    14. Re:Finally got it by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      I'm so old I have a core array inside a picture frame on display in my living room... along with a magnifying glass. And keep a tin of some genuine East German VEB Elektronik on the bookshelf in the office.

    15. Re:Finally got it by S.O.B. · · Score: 1

      PDP 8 with punch cards.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    16. Re:Finally got it by rnturn · · Score: 1

      Good grief! At least I don't keep my old 11/70 core memory board in my living room; I keep it downstairs hanging on the wall next to all the other computers. The missus would kill me if I insisted on having it upstairs.

      (Psst... you want a Q-bus wirewrap prototype board?)

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    17. Re:Finally got it by rnturn · · Score: 1

      ``I wouldn't be surprised if the four and five digit UIDs demonstrate a big cluster of people who are now between 30 and 40, though.''

      That makes me a real outlier adding a data point in support of your theory about that sigma being rather large.

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    18. Re:Finally got it by cr0nj0b · · Score: 1

      Sorry AC. You might be right, but you've spewed so much crap over the years I just cant believe you. 30

    19. Re:Finally got it by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      40 here, birthday's in March.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    20. Re:Finally got it by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      But did you have the gt40 display subsystem so you could run moon?

    21. Re:Finally got it by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      TECO was the biz unfortunately on our 11/03's it took up to much room to allow any real work :-)

    22. Re:Finally got it by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 1

      42 but this is also my second account. Forgot login credentials for my old one way back when.

  26. Indeed, this redesign will destroy Slashdot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your comment is absolutely correct.

    I don't think that those running Slashdot really appreciate how many people are going to be driven away once the beta is no longer optional, and the classic site is totally gone.

    The only reason I'm still around is because I can use the classic site. Once that's gone, I'll be gone, too. And I'm just one long-time user among many others who are in the same boat. I've seen enough other comments expressing similar sentiment about the beta site, but they always seem to get modded down. Huh, imagine that!

    The beta design is completely unusable. It's damn near impossible to even read the comment threads, never mind actually participate in them in any meaningful way. Every single thing about it is worse than the previous design. It's difficult to believe, but there really are no redeeming qualities at all. It's an all-around worse experience.

    If this new design is a response to dropping traffic numbers, I'm afraid it'll do nothing but accelerate the process beyond anyone's wildest dreams. We've seen what happened to Digg after they made this kind of a redesign mistake. That site never recovered, and likely never will.

    As a long-time Slashdot reader and commenter, I sincerely hope that those running Slashdot come to their senses soon, cut their losses, and scrap this entire redesign before it ruins Slashdot. This beta site has proven again and again that it is surely not the way forward. It is nothing but the way to destroy Slashdot, I'm afraid to say.

    1. Re:Indeed, this redesign will destroy Slashdot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well personally I think it might be an improvement. I quit Slashdot for years when they added those stupid sliders to set the comment threshold...honestly I can't remember how they did before anymore but I just remember it was no so fucking frustrating and clunky if you want to browse -1 and since sometimes good, funny or truthy stuff gets modded down there I like to see it. Seems like the new design shitcans that crap, so to me it's a step in the right direction. Now if they'd lift these stupid fucking posting timers where you can't have a conversation since you have to wait fucking 10 minutes or whatever (it almost never bothers to tell how long you have to wait...but sometimes it does? what in the fuck...) then maybe I would do more than come here, fire off one or two snarky posts then go browse elsewhere.

    2. Re:Indeed, this redesign will destroy Slashdot. by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Back in the day (archive.org is your friend), there were drop downs to select the threshold, flat/nested/no comments (wtf?)/threaded and sort order. Feeling nostalgic? kuro5hin is like a trip back in time...

      Comments were paged (50? 100? 250? per page) and the threading really fucked up their multipage logic. (imagine a 10 page article where pages 1-9 are all page 1 and page 10 is page 10) At least they fixed that when they javascriptified.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  27. It was already dead even before it started to live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So technically it is not dying.

  28. Re: Wrong. We in industry are very upset with Ruby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fedora is pretty hipsterish, but I couldn't care less it any of my applicants come in with a T-shirt. Some of the most childish, shitty, unprofessional people I know wear suits everywhere.

  29. People who can't actually program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always looking for the magic language which will solve all their problems.

    That's why the fads come and go, but the reality is nothing compensates for laziness and an inability to think clearly and coherently.

    Masses of effort put into 'frameworks' - which only regurgitate known solutions to known non-problems and once the house has been given a new coat of paint the original problems with the plumbing still remain - and the house painters move on to some other fashionable neighbourhood - leaving that faint whiff of raw sewage in their wake.

  30. He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This isn't about anyone's "personal feelings" about JavaScript.

    This is about the hard, objective facts. This is about basic software engineering principles. This is about a minimal level of professionalism.

    JavaScript is objectively a bad language. I really hope that we don't need to go through the list of problems with it, but maybe we should address at least some of the most serious problems. Its type system is very broken. Its object system is a joke (prototype OO is always inferior to class OO; that's why everyone tries to fake classes using prototypes, and the result is always terrible). Its comparison operators are broken. It doesn't offer sensible modularity. It doesn't offer useful namespacing. Its implementations are generally bad, even the ones receiving much investment and effort from large and well-funded organizations like Google, Apple, Mozilla and Microsoft. Its development tools are a decade or more behind those of Java and C++. It's rife with stupidity like semicolon insertion. It has almost no standard library, and what does exist exhibits complete idiocy in almost every respect.

    For crying out loud, the most respected JavaScript book is Crockford's "JavaScript: The Good Parts". Almost the entire book tells you to not use significant features of JavaScript! Only a very broken programming language would have a book like that become so popular and recommended.

    Professional software developers can only express disgust when it comes to JavaScript. There's just no way that anyone who cares about doing a good job can seriously consider it anything less that a terrible disaster. JavaScript is indisputably a horrible programming language. It's just not possible to suggest otherwise.

    1. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by tibman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bad language or not, it is already used heavily on the client-side. Using it server-side allows you to make use of the same objects without having to maintain things like validation logic in two languages. It also means that if you are using Karma or something similar for testing that you only need one testing framework. Otherwise you'd need two testing frameworks running. Switching gears from one language to the next isn't hard but going from strongly typed to dynamic often results in developers trying to strongly type their javascript or writing it in such a way that it becomes too rigid. Tests should be governing everything anyways, especially if it is TDD.

      My company is using C# on the back-end and javascript on the front. I write php+javascript at home though (and have experienced a life-time of derision from "professional" developers for it). I still write C/C++ for linux and embedded projects. Too many developers have decided their language is the best and everything else is horrible. When really, every language is covered in warts. Every language has (had) growing pains. Have you ever wondered why if your language is the best it is rarely used in all situations? That's because it's not the best tool for every job.

      Your kind is nothing new. Anyone who has a passion for programming runs into people with your attitude and just shrugs. It is almost like dealing with a form of bigotry.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    2. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by sheetsda · · Score: 1

      Its development tools are a decade or more behind those of Java and C++.

      It's worse than just being behind. Behind is a solvable problem. Basic IDE features like auto-completion/typo checking are impossible for the IDE when the content of an object can't be known until run-time. Consider a simple example that uses a random number to either define a given property on an object or not - the IDE fundamentally cannot know whether than property should show up in its autocomplete list. So I think the poor quality of the tools can also be blamed on poor JS design. JSDoc provides reasonable solution to this problem at the cost of writing a bunch of documentation that would be pedantic in other languages and negates weak types (not enforced unfortunately). I compare this to documenting every "int foo = 0;" in C++ with a comment saying "//this is an integer".

      Ultimately, I feel the lesson comes down to this: Weakly-typed languages are for smaller projects than strongly-typed languages.

      Unfortunately, if you need to do something in a browser you don't really have a strongly typed option right now. That is also a solvable problem, and as the browser becomes more and more important as a platform someone will solve it. Though, if you'd have asked me 10 years ago I'd have at least expected to be able to see the solution on the horizon by this point. :-(

    3. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh that was hella fun to read. So the biggest issue with JavaScript is that it's part of the dynamic language crowd, the same one that has generated the whole webolution (cause I don't see as many huge websites written in Java or C# as I see for the unholy trinity of Ruby/Python/PHP).

      Thing is good programmers leverage the fact that you need good short-term and mid-term memory to be a good programmer in the first place, name their variables semantically and write proper descriptive comments -- in any language.

      People have already grown accustomed to use runtime reflection and testing instead of compile-time errors, and people spend much more time chasing bugs than looking at compiler output -- even in compled and strongly typed languages.

    4. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, another Slashtard who thinks his opinions are an objective fact. How incredibly original and interesting...

    5. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by Horshu · · Score: 1

      This.

    6. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 1

      It's all about trade-offs. Dynamically typed languages are more flexible but you have to be more disciplined, especially when it comes to documentation. People who hate documenting things typically don't like dynamically typed languages. Unfortunately one of the trade-offs of the flexibility is worse IDE support, but you learn to live without autocomplete.

      That said I haven't used javascript in over 5 years and didn't like it at the time, but I use Python quite a bit and when I use other languages I find myself missing the language features of Python more often than I miss the IDE features I lose when writing Python code.

    7. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Quick and dirty != good and maintainable

      (python programmer here)

    8. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Just about every major website on the internet uses Java. I'm talking Google, Yahoo, Twitter, Netflix, Amazon, Best Buy, Target, etc. So, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

      Also, the "webolution" existed long before Node.js. Java and C# are responsible for the vast majority of it. JavaScript has largely been icing on the cake.

      Oh, and there's lots of other dynamic languages and most of them are better than JavaScript. Some are even suitable for large scale development. On the other hand, JavaScript is great for what it was defined for but it sucks balls for what it is used for today. Not surprising since the whole fucking thing was written in ten days.

      You're probably one of those people who thinks async I/O was invented by Joyent even though it's existed for decades.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    9. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by narcc · · Score: 1

      JavaScript is objectively a bad language.

      Objectively, you say? Maybe you don't know what that word means.

      Its object system is a joke (prototype OO is always inferior to class OO

      Are you high? No one could possibly be THAT stupid.

      Its comparison operators are broken.

      Nope, they work just fine. Maybe you are that stupid...

      For crying out loud, the most respected JavaScript book is Crockford's "JavaScript: The Good Parts". Almost the entire book tells you to not use significant features of JavaScript!

      I see that you haven't read it. You should. You'll find it enlightening. Well, assuming you can work through it. You'll find code examples that use operators. You seem to have an awful lot of trouble with those.

    10. Re:He's not "conceited". He's absolutely correct! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! This thread is supposed to be about Ruby, not Javascript!

      s/javascript/ruby/g

      Oh.

  31. We don't need you, Ruby! by bmimatt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dear Ruby: Please leave Chef behind and go and die in some dark corner. Take rails with you. Thanks.

  32. Wait. You're implying that Ruby is still a thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought the Ruby fad peaked in 2005 and then went under the radar by 2006.
    Now you're telling me that people still use it? WAT?

    Should I bother learning Ruby? What advantages does it have over its competitors? (Note: I don't consider "on rails" to be an advantage.)

  33. Professionalism does matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    He probably doesn't expect, or even want, them to wear suits. What some of these Ruby hipsters wear doesn't even approach "casual", let alone "business casual" or anything remotely considered "formal". It's better classified as "freak" or "social outcast".

    Too many of them dress, groom and act in a way that makes them come off as total fools. I mean, do I really want to hire somebody who wears thick-rimmed glasses without lenses? Do I want to hire somebody who spends hours styling his mustache, but ignores the rest of his personal hygiene? Do I want to hire somebody who turns every discussion into how his preferred beer or music is trendier or more obscure than some other brand of beer or type of music? Do I want to hire somebody who refuses to take off his fedora, even when in the presence of customers? Do I want to hire somebody who wears clothes in what's likely an intentional effort to stand out like a sore thumb? Do I want to hire somebody who tries to incorporate "irony" into everything? No.

    I'm not sure about you, but I don't think it's too much to expect a software developer to wear clean clothing without offensive messages or an overtly distracting appearance while on the job. I don't think it's too much to expect a software developer to shower and brush his teeth at least once on workdays. I don't think it's too much to expect a software developer to be presentable to clients who may expect even the smallest bit of professionalism.

    What they wear or how they act on their own time is their business. But if they're getting involved with a workplace of some sort, they sure as hell ought to be at least trying to act like adults, not just oversized children stuck with a high-school mindset and mentality, while on the job.

    1. Re:Professionalism does matter. by istartedi · · Score: 1

      The story was once related to me that a client was OK with our startup which was almost all "bro" looking frat-boy types. When I came out with my long hair, T-shirt and jeans he felt like the company was more "real". OTOH, our software performed to his satisfaction and I do shower every day. I don't have any piercings or other stuff that makes you want to look away. I think I come off like some kind of hippie/geek combo; but it's always hard to be objective about yourself.

      Anyway, professionalism matters *somewhat*. Software is a field where certain looks are more accepted than in other professions.

      BTW, I once worked along side a guy who SMELLED AWFUL. He wore collared shirts and slacks, business casual all the time. When the director got transferred to another office, he said something like, "sorry I have to go. Is there anything I can do for you?". I had one request: "make sure I don't have to sit next to that guy any more". He was a consultant, so it was easily arranged.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    2. Re:Professionalism does matter. by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Thanks God Steve Jobs never worked for you.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  34. Does the Tin Man have a sheet metal cock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Netcraft confirms it.

  35. You mean it has ever been alive? by godrik · · Score: 1

    Clearly I am not in "the web world" and I am seeing this question from an external viewpoint. But I never really saw anybody exciting about ruby or using ruby or praising ruby except one single phd student who was using it to make his experiments repeatable and automatically logged. Sure there is an occasional article on a new version of ruby, a flaw in ruby-on-rails. I heard people talk a lot about PHP, about Python, about javascript, to do pretty much anything. But quite frankly I never hear about ruby. Actually I hear more about LUA than I hear about ruby.

    For that reason I never took ruby for more than an hobbyist pet project. Maybe I am wrong, but seen from my chair of low-level programming guy, no one uses ruby.

    1. Re:You mean it has ever been alive? by quietwalker · · Score: 1

      It must be your scope of work that you haven't heard of it as a option for a given project, or that no one uses it.

      I'm often put in the architect position, or at least, the seat right next to them, and Ruby has frequently been brought up as a contender. It's not being brought up because it's especially good, but rather, it's evangelists, while small in number, tend to be loud in voice. It's what I call a 'toy language', in that it's fun to play with, and the kids especially seem to like it, but very few people with real experience consider using it for mission critical software. So there's always an individual who says "Have you thought about ruby?" - and they tend to get shot down by people who are driven by project requirements rather than the emotional appeal of getting to play with a new toy.

      So, it is out there, people bring it up from time to time because they've heard non-specific good things and don't want to miss out on a new trend. Very few orgs use it for any large projects, though you can find a number of small-scope applications (primarily web apps) using it - mainly as the result of hobbyist pet projects, as you said.

    2. Re:You mean it has ever been alive? by TimHunter · · Score: 1

      Actually I hear more about Lua than I hear about ruby.

      FTFY. Lua is not an acronym. http://www.lua.org/about.htmlhttp://www.lua.org/about.html

    3. Re:You mean it has ever been alive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, typical hipster drivel. You obviously don't work in any technical capacity or for any large orgs.

      Ruby and Python are as entrenched now as Java, C, Perl and C++. Us old time pros don't give a shit about you wet behind the ears guys who want to swing your dick around in lieu of getting actual work done.

      We use what works and loudmouths like you never see it because we only care about getting results. And yes, ruby is definitely in my toolbox, especially via dsls and puppet. It's a great language that helps get me out of the office at 6pm.

      And I've worked at many large companies, there's tons of major apps *professionally* written in ruby humming away in the server room. But you wouldn't know that because you've never been in the trenches.

      However, there's plenty of new languages dujour that would fit into your uninformed diatribe. Try Lua, Go or Haskell the next time you want to go on a echo chamber rant. If any of those survive then they'll be entrenched. And another hipster in the future will foolishly denigrate them after the fact as you did. Rinse repeat.

      Thus concludes *my* rant. Best of luck.

  36. Dead, actually by geekoid · · Score: 1
    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  37. So in other words, Ruby is running off the rails? by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Funny

    :snicker:

  38. Google alerts for Ruby have slowed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've had a Google Alert for several years now for "Ruby Program|Hack|Code|Example" that has had fewer and fewer hits in the last 18 months. Lately it's been only Ruby Tuesday charitable programs.

    1. Re:Google alerts for Ruby have slowed by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      It's called maturation and it has little to do with anything. Java is still used extensively and yet the news stream for it is pretty dead these days. The reason is that the massive flow of new libraries and tutorials and blog posts, etc. aren't there anymore. There's no point since everything you need already exists and new stuff is usually a modest improvement at best over the old stuff.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  39. hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm no fan of Ruby, but it does seem a lot of sites use some combination of PHP or ASP and Ajax (Javascript). And so long as we're talking about disasters, there are quite a few pieces of software that fit the bill, especially in open source circles. Might I suggest that a bad programmer is a bad programmer regardless of the tool? After all, you wouldn't trust an unlicensed builder with any tool on your home, would you?

    1. Re:hmm by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      His point is that certain tools attract bad programmers, because of the peculiarities of the culture that is formed around those tools. It doesn't mean that the tool itself is bad.

    2. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, his point was that Slashdot is really easy to troll. Just gotta wet a finger and hold it up to see which way the subtext is blowing.

  40. Re:Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm a CS prof and I'm sorry but I must agree with you.

    The trend is similar to other industries like butchers or the food service industry. Trade skills were optimized out and tasks were specialized to the point where a moron could do the job in the assembly line. The pay that came with skill and pride in a job well done was replaced with depressed drones who need to be morons so they don't kill themselves... or quit... or become a citizen.

    Most programming can be made into small problems that take less understanding and skill than used to be required. It's not assembly line but it is the same trend and at some point it'll be simple enough that the degree is little more than a tech school course dragged out into massive debt. Luckily, due to the nature of the work, there will be many years of higher level jobs... for 3rd world CS majors. May as well stick with your toy language because your only stable employment option will be scripting as a digital janitor... as I.T. likely part of a digital cleaning service (because that beats having to hire as many house janitors.)

  41. The real question is: by Exitar · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Has Ruby really been alive?

  42. Re:Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > You'll one of the morons, and you don't even know it.

    Clearly you'll one of them.

  43. I don't know. Let's find out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ./IsRubyDying.rb

    (Pinwheeling... pinwheeling... pinwheeling...)

    Hey guys, I'll let you know sometime tomorrow.

  44. Ruby isn't dying, it's purpose is changing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When Ruby was red-hot, it was when people were building entire apps in Rails. But now everyone realizes that the future is in JS-based front-ends based on Ember, Angular, or Chaplin, but that doesn't mean that people aren't using Ruby and Rails in the background for their back-end setups. It's quite common for me to hear about a fancy JS front-end being powered with JSON api endpoints being served by Ruby and Rails. Maybe this too will change, but right now from where I'm sitting Ruby seems still alive, just repurposed.

    1. Re:Ruby isn't dying, it's purpose is changing by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

      No mod points available, but this is the most spot on post on the whole page. It's sad you got a score of 1.

  45. so glad i don't do web dev... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just reading all these posts about the endless flood of boring fad techs used in web development makes so fucking glad i don't have to resort to such shit for a living.

  46. Re:Ugh by countach74 · · Score: 1

    Without a doubt, the lower the barrier to entry into programming, the more competition can be expected from less qualified individuals. This may very well be taken as a threat, as you seem to take it. However, if we consider the economy as a whole and not just a single industry (or even a slice of a single industry), there are great advantages to lowering these barriers. It allows things to be done cheaper, for those who would not have had a chance to make a living in the industry do just that: make a living. When an entire industry's costs are reduced and competition increased (especially an industry as pervasive and important as the tech industry), the rest of the economy is made richer. Exceptional quality C/C++ is not the only thing that matters.

  47. not true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Within a structure object, the non-bit-field members and the units in which bit-fields reside have addresses that increase in the order in which they are declared. A pointer to a structure object, suitably cast, points to its initial member (or if that member is a bit-field, then to the unit in which it resides), and vice versa. There may therefore be unnamed holes within a structure object, but not at its beginning, as necessary to achieve the appropriate alignment.

    http://port70.net/~nsz/c/c89/c89-draft.html#3.5.2.1

  48. Mod Parent Up. by mekkab · · Score: 1

    It's funny because it's always poignant; as long as something is a good tool for some job, it's got legs.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  49. Re:This is god. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed, we are horses, fucking away at those bastards.

  50. maturity??? by sribe · · Score: 1

    Slower rate of change in gems might indicate less need for change.

    1. Re:maturity??? by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Bingo! We have a winner!

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  51. As long as you keep talking about it - it lives on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in your heart...

  52. Falling behind platform; labor market health by tepples · · Score: 1

    Does it do what you need it to?

    One definition of "dying" is when a project is no longer maintained to keep up with changes in the underlying platform. A language whose implementations are "dying" in this way does not "do what you need it to".

    Can you get your project completed using it?

    Another is that it becomes harder for a coder to find jobs or for an employer to find people to maintain a project in a given language. A language "dying" in this way interferes with "get[ting] your project completed".

    I mean you don't see the engineers going "ZOMFG my VHDL is as out of fashion as an iPhone 3!" /swoon/.

    You do if, for example, state-of-the-art FPGAs start shipping only with Verilog compilers.

  53. Could be. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    Ruby has, since it has become popular, mostly been used for webdev tooling and frameworks. In that department it combines the crappyness of PHP with a communities arrogance of C and the toolkit variety of Perl. So it could be that traction won't hold as long and good as some would like it to. PHP is deeply entrenched in serverside web development and the new kid on the block definitely is JavaScript with Node.js offering Serverside development in the turing complete language that also drives todays web frontend logic.

    New serverside web projects I'd personally do in PHP or - if time and resources allow for experimenting - I'd use Node.js. For the simple reason that it offers the same PL on the serverside that we use for Ajax.

    Bottom line:
    With Node.js on the rise and JS offering basically the same features that people rave about in Ruby I would be suprised if Ruby loses traction again.

    My 2 cents.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  54. Good tool doesn't imply legs by tepples · · Score: 1

    as long as something is a good tool for some job, it's got legs

    Counterexample: Kevin Michael Connolly is a good tool for the job of photography.

    1. Re:Good tool doesn't imply legs by mekkab · · Score: 1

      WIN. You win.

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  55. Re:Node.js? Dude, that was so last year by Lisias · · Score: 1

    Sadly, those kids are hired and keep chasing the latest and greatest (including jobs) and leave their one trick pony app behind that was written in "the next big thing" language with no knowledge transfer or support.

    What can I say? Taking advantage from dumbasses with money to lose is not a crime and everybody (including the ones that can't code) must eat!

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  56. Re:Node.js? Dude, that was so last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cool kids are using Go for their server apps and infrastructure projects.

    Go!?! That's so old school, Sir. The insiders know, the really cool people know it's all about using Dart.

  57. hmm... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    Python and/or Django: Instagram, reddit, YouTube, Disqus, Pinterest, bitbucket, The Onion, New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, Yahoo Maps, Battlefield 2, Civilization 4, etc...

    Ruby and/or Rails: Hulu, Funny or Die, github, Groupon, Twitter (dropped due to scalability concerns), etc...

  58. here's a difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ruby is actually fun to program in.

    JavaScript is horrifically painful to develop in. I would compare writing in javascript to gluing thumb tacks to the keys on the keyboard dangerous side up, and then trying to write OO COBOL.

  59. Measuring something different by mysidia · · Score: 1

    graph on the release date of gems over time could help determine an answer.

    Perhaps that would just show you if 'gems' are dying. COBOL^H^H^H^H^HRuby, could still be thriving.

    This is like trying to use CPAN project release dates to determine if Perl is dying.

  60. What's Ruby? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shitty web tech. Dying? Who cares.

  61. Re: Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank god this whole toy "web" thing is going away! At last we can get back to using real programs, on real computers, called mainframes.

  62. Re:Javascript is Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crack open the books and learn Javascript...

  63. Re:They are hiring... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could maintain it if kept current...

  64. Re:Deflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wages...

  65. Butthurt by hazah · · Score: 1

    Too many people here suffer from butthurt. Detach yourselves from the desire for more butthurt. There are two types of languages: the ones people complain about, and the ones nobody uses. All this butthurt proves this point.

  66. Practical book giveaway: Ruby vs. D by darenw · · Score: 1

    FWIW, at one place I worked there was a table anyone could dump a book on for others to "borrow". No real expectation of getting it back, but a way to pass on unwanted books to someone who might find it useful.

    I wanted to reduce my collection of books. So I dumped a less-popular Ruby book onto that table. It vanished before the end of the day. I dumped a couple other ruby books, including The Ruby Way and some book on Ruby brain-teaser quizes, something like that. Poof, as if done by a magician trying to impress members of the opposite sex, they vanished quickly and completely, by the next time I passed through that room. Interesting.

    Then I dumped Andrei Alexandrescu's The D Programming Language. It sat for a day, then another day, and another. After a week it was still there. Eventually someone took it. At least at this one company, D is 1/100th as popular as Ruby. Neither language is used officially on company projects - it's all Java, C++, C# and Python. Internal web sites do not use RoR that I know of.

    Ruby is a fine language, but in practical implementation other languages, in particular, Python run circles around it. A circle. Maybe half a circle, but you know what I mean - Ruby is fine but never in first place. I still use it for some electronics graphics (http://www.darenscotwilson.com/spec/stereo888/stereo888.html) It's certainly not dying if there are such quick book-snatchers in a company not using it.

    OTOH, those who know of D like it quite well, actually use it, try to spread the word, and that includes me. Maybe D is in the stage of early growth outside it's originating community, where Ruby was in 199x where I'm not sure what 'x' is.

    D is clearly growing, but has a long way to go, while Ruby is way up there, and has a long way to go if it is in fact shrinking.

    1. Re:Practical book giveaway: Ruby vs. D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      D is to C++ what DR-DOS was to MS-DOS. A little cleaned up, maybe a little better than its model, when you consider both as laboratory snapshots as opposed to continually evolving offerings in the marketplace. In other words, D is as irrelevant today as DR-DOS was in the '90s.

  67. not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perl and Python have both just about vanished from the web

    What?

    Last time I checked, the web world was founded on perl and python, and things weren't going nowhere.

    Where do you believe the web world migrated to? do you believe that all the big sites rewrote all their Python and Perl code to follow yet another fad language?

  68. Web only, I hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they finish mruby. It would be nice to have an interpreter with full unicode support which aims at the embedded scripting domain.
    For web related stuff, I couldn't care less.

  69. If Ruby is dying, what the right path? by taxman_10m · · Score: 1

    If someone doesn't have a CS background and yet would like to get into programming in some fashion, what should they be doing instead of Ruby? Python or Java?

  70. Typo... by gentryx · · Score: 1

    Nice try (intentionally spelling "java script" is not cute, dude!).

    What makes you think that this was intentional and not just a typo?

    --
    Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    1. Re:Typo... by Lisias · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that this was intentional and not just a typo?

      Your agenda. Your post is clearly biased on defending Ruby. That would be Ok, we're all biased somehow - but experience taught me that tech people has a strong inclination to include lies and fallacies while arguing on subjects he/she has a bias on.

      "Javascript" is a word massively disseminated - very improbable that one professional that makes a living in this field would misspell this word the way you did. You didn't switched or missed a letter, you inserted a space between two recognizable words, the kind of error my mom or sister would do (as "javascript" is not a recognizable symbol for them, but "java" and "script" are) , but not my brother (as he works on the field too and, so, "javascript" is an easily recognizable symbol for him).

      Of course, perhaps you are not a professional on the field - but so, why are you debating about Ruby?

      Granted, "improbable" is not the same to "impossible". But, again, your assertiveness on the matter, the lack of space for a debate and the apparent carefully picken options to compare with (making Ruby looks good) makes me think you have an Agenda on the subject.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    2. Re:Typo... by gentryx · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that this was intentional and not just a typo?

      Your agenda. Your post is clearly biased on defending Ruby.

      Interestingly I do not have an agenda on Ruby and in fact it was a simple typo. As a non-native speaker I find the way how names and compounds are handled in the English language confusing at best. It's much easier in German: all compounds are written in one single word, no spaces, no dashes. You're allowed to add dashes to make life for the reader easier (Atombombenzündmechanismus is not a handy word).

      That would be Ok, we're all biased somehow - but experience taught me that tech people has a strong inclination to include lies and fallacies while arguing on subjects he/she has a bias on.

      Isn't it ironic that your own post represents a fallacy? Of course I have the arrogance to assume that I know best which motives my original post was based on -- and which not.

      "Javascript" is a word massively disseminated - very improbable that one professional that makes a living in this field would misspell this word the way you did.

      See, indeed I am a CS professional. I've specialized in HPC. The way I use Ruby is very different from what the web folks use it for: thanks to Puppet Ruby has become a popular language for managing system configuration, especially for large scale deployments. Hence I do have a significant exposure to Ruby, without ever doing any serious JS coding. And that's what I criticize in TFA: it seems to equate Ruby with "language for web apps". Its argument revolves around "b/c of node.js becoming popular, Ruby is/might be dying". And that's just wrong because even if Rails would just disappear, there would still be tons of valid use cases for Ruby (text mangling, build automation, rapid prototyping, network automation...).

      If fact I don't care much about whether Ruby is popular or not. I've used it before Rails was popular, and I wouldn't have any second thoughts about adding another language to my portfolio, should I see any major benefit in it.

      --
      Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    3. Re:Typo... by gentryx · · Score: 1

      BTW: I just had a look at your website and I'd hazard the guess that there are almost as many typos as words on it. What's your "professional agenda" behind those? ;-)

      --
      Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
    4. Re:Typo... by Lisias · · Score: 1

      No agenda at all.

      I'm not using any of my typos trying to prove or demonstrate something... :-)

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    5. Re:Typo... by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Interestingly I do not have an agenda on Ruby and in fact it was a simple typo. As a non-native speaker I find the way how names and compounds are handled in the English language confusing at best. It's much easier in German: all compounds are written in one single word, no spaces, no dashes. You're allowed to add dashes to make life for the reader easier (Atombombenzündmechanismus is not a handy word).

      Sprechen sie Deutsch? I took some lessons some years ago (but forgot almost everything, since I don't practice it). The way you form your sentences are very different from the way we form ours (my mother tongue is Portuguese), that it's very different from the way english speakers form theirs. Pretty messy.

      Well, I'll buy it. A guy from a culture that likes to glue long words (like "lebensabschnittgefährter") will, indeed, have some difficulties while choosing what words should be separated, and what words would not.

      "Javascript" is still a widely known "symbol", but if you like me still build your phrases mentally in your mother tongue and then translates it "on the fly" to english, the "typing phase" happens after the "phrasing phase", that it's when symbols matters. At least, it appears to be how some of my worst english phrases was formed in the past.

      What can I say except.. My apologies. There's some kind of statement I can make on my previous posts that would help make amendments to you?

      That would be Ok, we're all biased somehow - but experience taught me that tech people has a strong inclination to include lies and fallacies while arguing on subjects he/she has a bias on.

      Isn't it ironic that your own post represents a fallacy? Of course I have the arrogance to assume that I know best which motives my original post was based on -- and which not.

      Or perhaps just the evidence that my statement is true, as I'm a tech guy! =D

      Experience also taught me that germans are very fond of correctness and ethics (I worked for Siemens Mobile, and later, for Siemens VDO in the past and had contact with a lot of germans). That would be a fallacy too?

      Anyway, your motivations are clear only to you. The rest of us must deal with probabilities: are you making a honest mistake? Are you astroturfing? Or just trolling the subject? Nobody but you really knows, but we must make a decision nevertheless. I did mine based on my previous experience with Ruby/PHP/Whatever evangelists (some of them, being my co-workers from yet another job I had, most of them here at Slashdot). As it appears, I made a mistake.

      What you did was very "german", by the way: most of people around here would just offend me and then would use some modpoints to modtrolling me (it happens a lot... =P). But you had gone through my previous posts to gather intel and formulate a (logic) defense of your cause. Thanks.

      "Javascript" is a word massively disseminated - very improbable that one professional that makes a living in this field would misspell this word the way you did.

      See, indeed I am a CS professional. I've specialized in HPC. The way I use Ruby is very different from what the web folks [...] (text mangling, build automation, rapid prototyping, network automation...) [...]

      Ruby and Rails are so tightly connect nowadays that I think is improbable the one would survive the demise of the other.

      I know that Ruby, the Language, can be used to a LOT of other things - I also did it myself, mainly to get rid of Perl in my life. :-) (man, I hate Perl... )

      I'm very fond of Ruby, I like the way it does things very much.

      However, Ruby the Language is somehow hostage of the Ruby, the Rails workhorse. So, yes, I think that Ruby is "dying" as a well accepted tool for programming. The lack of support will make things worse for the Maintainer, that will have less support to do a good job - and maintaining a project l

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  71. Ruby Death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or it could be that it has most of the features for its market niche hence development slowing is a sign of maturity.

  72. 2 weeks late, yes? by gentryx · · Score: 1

    Sorry, typo...

    --
    Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp