5 ms·

I am personally concerned that the Rubyists will flood the iOS development space, bringing their culture and introducing a dogmatic and insular environment. We

• jeremymcanally 14y ago
  How ridiculous. You do realize that every programming community has "dogmatic and insular" people, right? There are Cocoa people I've talked with who were, seriously, the rudest human beings I've ever had the displeasure of talking to. Douchebags are everywhere and it's sort of silly to paint an entire community with a broad brush. We're doing lots of good things, too, despite our own share of jerks.
• danneu 14y ago
  Rest assured that your attitude is far more insufferable and real than the "culture invasion" you're concerned about.
• jenius 14y ago
  Goodness - what a hateful, stereotyping, and narrow-minded comment. I'm enjoy ruby and spend a lot of time writing it, but would never pass judgement like this on anyone who uses another language. I've never interacted with anyone writing in any language that has an attitude like this - let's hope that you are an edge case...
  • nupark2 14y ago
    Honestly, I'm part of the mostly-silent majority of polyglot programmers that choose the best language for the job and have grown increasingly weary of Rubyists wheel invention and focus on rock star programming and rock star rants. It's the only community that I find socially insufferable, and while an unpopular opinion here, I don't relish the notion of Rubyist culture. Culture aside, simply technologically, Ruby has nothing significant to offer as compared to the many existing languages and technology stacks, especially those pushing forward language and runtime research. The only argument for Ruby here seems to be opening the market to developers unwilling to move beyond it.
    • nupark2 14y ago
      Following up to note that: - Despite the opinion clearly being unpopular here, I stand by it: the ruby community is toxic-at-best, and totally technogically uninteresting. Individual Ruby developers may be very nice people, but that doesn't make the technology any more notable or novel, and doesn't change the general tenor of the Ruby community, which seems to be driven by larger than life personalities and a general lack of solid applied computer science.
      • sanderjd 14y ago
        Though you seem completely uninterested in anything but repeating your toxic, dogmatic, and insular refrain, I may as well add my voice to the chorus of those who see a different community than the one you do. But I also want to respond to the somewhat more interesting portions of your argument - is ruby "technically interesting", "notable", "novel", and/or lacking in "solid applied computer science", and to what extent do those things matter? I think it is technically interesting because you can do much with little, notable because it combines the elegant OO of Smalltalk and the weak functional programming of Lisp with an intuitive syntax reminiscent of though dissimilar to Python, not at all novel because it prefers to embrace good ideas from its predecessors, and quite thankfully lacking in leakage of hard computer science into mundane programs. It is wrong for many jobs, but right for many others, and for that it is interesting. It is one of a multitude of languages for which the same can be said.
        • billsix 14y ago
          How does it combine the OO of smalltalk and the functional programming of lisp? What was smalltalk lacking that ruby added?
          • davesims 14y ago
            Adoption.
            • sanderjd 14y ago
• deeds 14y ago
  Don't be scurrrreed
• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
• wtn 14y ago
  Many Mac devs who attended WWDC before the iPhone shipped say the same thing now about iOS developers…