5 ms·
I prefer Ruby generally, but honestly Ruby and Python are sufficiently similar that I'd rather smart programmers put their time to good use doing something othe
by phren0logy 16y ago
I prefer Ruby generally, but honestly Ruby and Python are sufficiently similar that I'd rather smart programmers put their time to good use doing something other than reimplementing Python's science libs.
I think that making some tools available in a totally different language (maybe something functional) would be much more useful, because it would allow for a very different approach to the problem if needed.
In a perfect world, we could also have the option of using light wrappers around OpenCL matrix libraries, and push the linear algebra to GPUs that eat matrices for breakfast.
- cageface 16y agoAgreed. There's only so much skilled labor available for this kind of thing. This is exactly why I'm focusing on Python lately. Ruby is a great language but I don't want to be pigeon-holed as a web guy forever. I've already done over 10 years of web dev and I'd like to try out a couple of new problem domains before I kick the bucket.
- djacobs 16y agoI'll have to agree as well. The only problem for me is: if not on the web, how are we going to make GUIs that aren't severely limited to our platform? Wasn't web design supposed to solve the "platform question"?
- xiongchiamiov 16y agoThere are a number of cross-platform GUI toolkits. For instance, QT is pretty nice wherever you put it, and KDE's been putting a lot of work into making their libraries and such work on Windows.
- djacobs 16y agoI'm not a huge fan of Qt simply because I can't get it to feel natural on Gnome, my desktop of choice. I've looked into Gtk+, but I'm not so sure I want to commit to it yet. Are there plans to make Qt feel more natural on Gnome and OS X?