4 ms·
One of my biggest gripes with Ruby (probably after the abuse of `method_missing` to add unsearchable method invocations) has got to be the naming of packages. I
by DinaCoder99 3y ago
One of my biggest gripes with Ruby (probably after the abuse of `method_missing` to add unsearchable method invocations) has got to be the naming of packages. I have no data to back this up so I might be off-base, but in my decade-plus of working with the language I have many memories of becoming frustrated because I couldn't remember a library's name or couldn't immediately figure out the function of a library I found in a Gemfile or an import. This is absolutely a problem with all modern package-oriented languages, but for whatever reason I perceive Ruby as having the worst case of it of all the ecosystems I've used.
- thih9 3y agoDo you remember what was the name of that library? What name would you prefer instead?
- jen20 3y agoAn example: nokogiri. Something like “libxml-sys” would be more obvious.
- thih9 3y agoI see your point. At the same time Nokogiri for me has more character. It feels justified too, the gem is everywhere and it’s very useful. Also, since this is one of the most popular ruby gems, it’s hard for me to imagine that a rubyist would forget what this gem is about. Plus, there is already a “libxml-ruby” gem. I like having library names that are distinct. But yes, ruby does indeed have a lot of names like Nokogiri, (or Capybara, or VCR, etc).
- riffraff 3y agoI'm afraid everyone does this, I did java for a while and I still don't know what "Catalina" is and how it related to Tomcat.