5 ms·

Yeah, I have the opposite reaction. I think python is very elegant, and I really appreciate it's "one and only one way" philosophy, as opposed to ruby's "you a

Yeah, I have the opposite reaction. I think python is very elegant, and I really appreciate it's "one and only one way" philosophy, as opposed to ruby's "you are a special snowflake" approach. It really can be just a matter of preference, though. Python and Ruby are so, so, so similar, that ultimately I find flamewars between them to be tiring at best.

treetrouble 15y ago
Characterizing the Ruby philosophy as "you are a special snowflake" is, well, starting a flamewar
- michaelchisari 15y ago
  Honest question, how would you characterize it?
  - lusis 15y ago
    TMTOWTDI. Ruby, for all the problems it can cause, gives you. More than one way to solve a problem. Yes, it sometimes makes it harder to dive into other's code but I happen to enjoy the expressiveness. Mind you I love some of the things about python too. Namespacing being one of the primary ones. Another is that, short of advances pythonfu (like django does), I can usually pick up someone else's code and dive right in. Python has amazing access to mathematical and scientific libraries as mentioned. However with ruby, I would punt to the Java ecosystem via JRuby if I needed that. It's a lot like design patterns. Some patterns don't fit in all languagea but that's usually a case of the language itself giving you another way. Mixins in ruby are a good example.
  - treetrouble 15y ago
    With Ruby, the flexibility of being able to do things in more than one way makes it necessary to learn conventions rather than just the language spec. Sometimes breaking those conventions can have a tremendous upside. Some people find that upside worthwhile and others don't.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
djacobs 15y ago
I think if you read the followup article, you'll see it's not flame bait. I'm legitimately trying to foster a discussion here.
- michaelchisari 15y ago
  Oh yeah, that was more of a general comment on python vs. ruby discussions, not a specific reference to your article. Although the point stands that I don't see the purpose in passionately arguing one or the other, since they are so similar.
fdr 15y ago
My general feeling coincides with yours, I can't see how someone can look at Ruby and say it's consistent, although it's not the up to the insanity of C++ or Perl (people only make it that way with a combination of poor judgement and dynamic metaprogramming). It does have some quirks that are at times convenient, but this whole notion of "consistency" in Ruby makes me suspect whether I can really understand where the author is coming from.

treetrouble 15y ago

Characterizing the Ruby philosophy as "you are a special snowflake" is, well, starting a flamewar

michaelchisari 15y ago
Honest question, how would you characterize it?
- lusis 15y ago
  TMTOWTDI. Ruby, for all the problems it can cause, gives you. More than one way to solve a problem. Yes, it sometimes makes it harder to dive into other's code but I happen to enjoy the expressiveness. Mind you I love some of the things about python too. Namespacing being one of the primary ones. Another is that, short of advances pythonfu (like django does), I can usually pick up someone else's code and dive right in. Python has amazing access to mathematical and scientific libraries as mentioned. However with ruby, I would punt to the Java ecosystem via JRuby if I needed that. It's a lot like design patterns. Some patterns don't fit in all languagea but that's usually a case of the language itself giving you another way. Mixins in ruby are a good example.
- treetrouble 15y ago
  With Ruby, the flexibility of being able to do things in more than one way makes it necessary to learn conventions rather than just the language spec. Sometimes breaking those conventions can have a tremendous upside. Some people find that upside worthwhile and others don't.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

djacobs 15y ago

I think if you read the followup article, you'll see it's not flame bait. I'm legitimately trying to foster a discussion here.

michaelchisari 15y ago
Oh yeah, that was more of a general comment on python vs. ruby discussions, not a specific reference to your article. Although the point stands that I don't see the purpose in passionately arguing one or the other, since they are so similar.

fdr 15y ago

My general feeling coincides with yours, I can't see how someone can look at Ruby and say it's consistent, although it's not the up to the insanity of C++ or Perl (people only make it that way with a combination of poor judgement and dynamic metaprogramming). It does have some quirks that are at times convenient, but this whole notion of "consistency" in Ruby makes me suspect whether I can really understand where the author is coming from.