3 ms·
Am I incorrect in assuming that Dylan is a faster and better designed ruby? At first glance that is what it appears to be.
by codygman 13y ago
Am I incorrect in assuming that Dylan is a faster and better designed ruby? At first glance that is what it appears to be.
- rayiner 13y agoDylan and Ruby aren't that similar, except to the extent of their use of "end" as a delimiter (inherited from Algol through Pascal). In Dylan, methods do not belong to objects, and can dispatch on more than one of their parameters. Ruby, on the other hand, uses more traditional Smalltalk-style OOP. Dylan isn't necessarily better designed than Ruby (though I think it is), but rather it's less eccentric than Ruby and more targeted at static compilation. It has type declarations the compiler can use to eliminate dynamic dispatch, it has proper lexical scoping allowing variables to be allocated to registers, etc.
- codygman 13y agoThanks for the explanation! I also noticed the static typing after I posted this.