4 ms·
It's unbelievable that an article can get to HN front page in which the author doesn't know the difference between Rails and Ruby. So annoying! This is NOT Rub
by Walkman 10y ago
It's unbelievable that an article can get to HN front page in which the author doesn't know the difference between Rails and Ruby. So annoying!
This is NOT Ruby for God's sake:
SYSTEM_EPOCH = 1.day.ago.to_i
- wolf550e 10y agoI thought it was a truism that because of all the rampant monkeypatching, many ruby developers don't know how to use ruby without rails?
- Walkman 10y agoOk, now I know why! There are a lot of ignorant people here, wow!
- sctb 10y agoThis account has been posting many unsubstantive comments recently. Please stop and re-read the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. We have to ban accounts that continue on like this.
- randall 10y agoPeople are downvoting I think because this is a rather pedantic point to be annoyed by. The tone is one of superiority, rather than pointing out the simple mistake. Calling a rails function a ruby function is unlikely to invalidate the entirety of the article.
- Walkman 10y agoI know the point is somewhat pedantic, but I just don't really like to learn from people who doesn't even know what is what. Somewhat invalidates the article IMO, but I read it anyway, just with very carefully, trying not to learn anything just understanding the basic idea he/she want to tell. I think they downvote because they are so ignorant I can't even believe it.
- randomdata 10y agoPerhaps they are downvoting because of your own ignorance? The aforementioned code does depend on ActiveSupport (or similar library), but has absolutely nothing to do with Rails.
- Walkman 10y agoThanks for explaining!
- dvdhnt 10y agoclass Walkman < Troll def comment self.ignorance += 1 end end Pretty sure that's standard ruby.
- grzm 10y agoHN users will also down vote for tone and complaining about receiving down votes. Please strive to contribute constructively and in keeping with the guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- jklein11 10y agoIt is Ruby in that it requires a Ruby interpreter to execute that line of code. It certainly isn't Javascript or Python. Is the article missing the context that these lines of code are being executed along side the Rails framework? Sure. Is it distracting from the main meaning of the article? I would say not.
- Walkman 10y agoFor me it questions that the author is knowledgable enough to teach me any detail about Ruby.
- jklein11 10y agoThat's fair, and definitely warrants skepticism, but was there anything in the article that you found counterfactual? I'm no RoR expert, but I do enjoy looking at how other people solved problems. Is there anything in the article that's counterfactual or that you've experienced causes headaches down the road?
- mikewhy 10y agoReally it's Ruby with the activesupport gem. Not a huge leap in simply calling it Ruby.
- Walkman 10y agoYou are the only one cared to elaborate, thank you very much!
- jsjohnst 10y agoIt most certainly is Ruby. It's Ruby with a library (ActiveSupport) added that augments with extra helper methods. When you write Ruby code that adds methods does it suddenly become not Ruby anymore?
- pselbert 10y agoI am the original author, and I assure you I know the difference between Ruby and Rails. This was written over 3 years ago, and while I don't remember all of the details, I don't believe conflating Ruby level code with Rails specific code corrupts the article.
- Sean1708 10y agoSurely if it's Rails then it must also, by definition, be Ruby?