4 ms·

I'd also say that ruby has done a better job of moving forward. Compare ruby 1.9 to python 3. I think JRuby is more mature than jpython, and I know this will st

by jshen 15y ago

I'd also say that ruby has done a better job of moving forward. Compare ruby 1.9 to python 3. I think JRuby is more mature than jpython, and I know this will start the flames, but I think ruby is clearly better for web stuff; not just rails, but the whole ecosystem. Edit: I also think bundler is better than what is going on in python land.

masklinn 15y ago
> Compare ruby 1.9 to python 3. They're not comparable, so no. > I think JRuby is more mature than jpython Pretty different situations, from 2006 to 2009 two lead JRuby developers were hired specifically for that by Sun (later left for EngineYard) and a third was hired by ThoughtWorks for the same. For Jython this only happened in 2008, after the project had pretty much gone on freeze due to the original founder leaving to work on the Pypy project. Compare IronPython to IronRuby instead, and the situation is reversed. Same if you compare Rubinius and Pypy. > and I know this will start the flames, but I think ruby is clearly better for web stuff That's your personal judgement, I don't agree.
- jshen 15y ago
  You dodged the first two issues. Python 3 is causing serious pain, does django work with it yet? Second, who cares why JRuby is more mature, it is.
  - masklinn 15y ago
    > You dodged the first two issues. No (and screw you for your unwarranted downvote you ass) > Python 3 is causing serious pain, does django work with it yet? I did not deny that, I denied your equation of Python 3 with Ruby 1.9 when they have absolutely nothing in common and had very different goals. > Second, who cares why JRuby is more mature, it is. That's not the issue with your question, the issue is that you cherrypick a single alternative implementation which supports whatever claim you're trying to make and ignore all others. That makes your claim both dishonest and irrelevant. IronPython is more mature than IronRuby, Pypy is more mature than Rubinius, by your comment that makes 2 for 1 therefore Python is superior to Ruby right? That's nonsense, because your original assertion is nonsense. But hey, at the end of the day I couldn't expect much more from somebody who decided to turn a discussion on relative merits into a dick-size contest. I guess the western ruby community has not matured as much as I thought it did. Thanks for bringing me back to reality.
    - jshen 15y ago
      I didn't down vote you, it seems HN doesn't allow me to down vote on threads I'm participating in. If it did, I'd down vote your last comment. I think the JVM is the more significant platform compared to the clr and rubinius/pypy. Therefore I think it's maturity is more significant.
      - sunqiang 15y ago
        The PyPy team is amazing, for example Quora is now running on PyPy. and it's easy for a Python programmer run PyPy as an alternative(and hopefully fast) implementation.
    - ramblerman 15y ago
      It's ironic that you would point the finger at communities for not being mature. Yours is by far the least pleasant and counterproductive thread on this entire discussion
Daishiman 15y ago
I would say that the policy of rapid movement it has its ups and downsides; Python code is generally very stable between versions and breakage is well-documented. So far I haven't seen the same thing going on in Ruby land. JRuby is clearly more advanced that Jython. I'm guessing that with the advance of PyPy, other Python interpreters just aren't getting that much attention, which is a bit unfortunate.
- jshen 15y ago
  rapid movement definitely has it's downsides. However, I don't know what you mean when you say that ruby code isn't stable between versions. Do you mean between versions of ruby? If so, again, the transition from ruby 1.8 to ruby 1.9 was much much better than the transition from python 2 to python 3.
  - sunqiang 15y ago
    Python 2 to Python 3 is a big jump once in a lifetime. what about ruby 1.9 to ruby 2.0?
    - jshen 15y ago
      ruby 2.0 will likely be just as easy as 1.8 to 1.9, if not easier.
      - sunqiang 15y ago
        so, it's not as easy as python 2.x to 2.(x+1) and python 3.x to 3.(x+1). will every version update of Ruby will suffer as mush as Ruby 1.8 to 1.9?

by jshen 15y ago

masklinn 15y ago

> Compare ruby 1.9 to python 3. They're not comparable, so no. > I think JRuby is more mature than jpython Pretty different situations, from 2006 to 2009 two lead JRuby developers were hired specifically for that by Sun (later left for EngineYard) and a third was hired by ThoughtWorks for the same. For Jython this only happened in 2008, after the project had pretty much gone on freeze due to the original founder leaving to work on the Pypy project. Compare IronPython to IronRuby instead, and the situation is reversed. Same if you compare Rubinius and Pypy. > and I know this will start the flames, but I think ruby is clearly better for web stuff That's your personal judgement, I don't agree.

jshen 15y ago
You dodged the first two issues. Python 3 is causing serious pain, does django work with it yet? Second, who cares why JRuby is more mature, it is.
- masklinn 15y ago
  > You dodged the first two issues. No (and screw you for your unwarranted downvote you ass) > Python 3 is causing serious pain, does django work with it yet? I did not deny that, I denied your equation of Python 3 with Ruby 1.9 when they have absolutely nothing in common and had very different goals. > Second, who cares why JRuby is more mature, it is. That's not the issue with your question, the issue is that you cherrypick a single alternative implementation which supports whatever claim you're trying to make and ignore all others. That makes your claim both dishonest and irrelevant. IronPython is more mature than IronRuby, Pypy is more mature than Rubinius, by your comment that makes 2 for 1 therefore Python is superior to Ruby right? That's nonsense, because your original assertion is nonsense. But hey, at the end of the day I couldn't expect much more from somebody who decided to turn a discussion on relative merits into a dick-size contest. I guess the western ruby community has not matured as much as I thought it did. Thanks for bringing me back to reality.
  - jshen 15y ago
    I didn't down vote you, it seems HN doesn't allow me to down vote on threads I'm participating in. If it did, I'd down vote your last comment. I think the JVM is the more significant platform compared to the clr and rubinius/pypy. Therefore I think it's maturity is more significant.
    - sunqiang 15y ago
      The PyPy team is amazing, for example Quora is now running on PyPy. and it's easy for a Python programmer run PyPy as an alternative(and hopefully fast) implementation.
  - ramblerman 15y ago
    It's ironic that you would point the finger at communities for not being mature. Yours is by far the least pleasant and counterproductive thread on this entire discussion

Daishiman 15y ago

I would say that the policy of rapid movement it has its ups and downsides; Python code is generally very stable between versions and breakage is well-documented. So far I haven't seen the same thing going on in Ruby land. JRuby is clearly more advanced that Jython. I'm guessing that with the advance of PyPy, other Python interpreters just aren't getting that much attention, which is a bit unfortunate.

jshen 15y ago
rapid movement definitely has it's downsides. However, I don't know what you mean when you say that ruby code isn't stable between versions. Do you mean between versions of ruby? If so, again, the transition from ruby 1.8 to ruby 1.9 was much much better than the transition from python 2 to python 3.
- sunqiang 15y ago
  Python 2 to Python 3 is a big jump once in a lifetime. what about ruby 1.9 to ruby 2.0?
  - jshen 15y ago
    ruby 2.0 will likely be just as easy as 1.8 to 1.9, if not easier.
    - sunqiang 15y ago
      so, it's not as easy as python 2.x to 2.(x+1) and python 3.x to 3.(x+1). will every version update of Ruby will suffer as mush as Ruby 1.8 to 1.9?