>* It seems to encourage highly dynamic code where even identifiers are dynamically created, so often you'll find an identifier, and try to search for its defin

>* It seems to encourage highly dynamic code where even identifiers are dynamically created, so often you'll find an identifier, and try to search for its definition but get zero results. I've had to take care of 3 large ruby codebases at different companies and this is what kills ruby for me. A lot of ruby programmers think they are being clever when writing crazy dynamic ruby code, but they are only creating technical debt. Years later when they have left and the "context knowledge " is gone from the team, the Ruby code is a huge mess of "magical" code. And rails with its "implicit" functionality depending on method name. A lot of Ruby feels like "magical" to me (in that, things work because of some hidden implicit readmson). I prefer code that is explicit, in your face. You can quickly see what it does and how it does it. Principle of least surprise and "don't make me think". As a language it's pretty, I like to say that Ruby is really object oriented while python is a mix of stuff (why len(x) instead of x.len??)