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."

16 of 400 comments (clear)

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

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

      Careful there, kid. :)

    3. 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.

    4. 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
    5. 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.
    6. 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.

  2. 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.

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

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

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. So in other words, Ruby is running off the rails? by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Funny

    :snicker:

  10. 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