Forum: Ruby a good career choice ?

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
unknown (Guest)
on 2009-01-07 12:07
(Received via mailing list)
Hello, I am from the USA and I graduated last year with a BS. I've
been trying to find a job doing HTML and CSS or Flash, but to no
avail. I know finding a job will be hard, but I want to give myself
the best chance of success. A couple people that I have talked to
suggested that I learn Ruby on Rails saying that it was the "future".
I've spent the past few days reading book tutorials on basic Ruby, and
it seems like something I could do and enjoy. Would learning RoR be a
good skill to learn to help me better get a job? If not, then is there
another language/s that would be good to learn?  To any responses -
thanks in advance.

-ryan
Larz (Guest)
on 2009-01-07 13:36
(Received via mailing list)
What was your BS in ? Are you a CS major ?

 I have a BS in Comp Sci. I did C++ for many years, and was preparing
to go into Java certification until I found out about Ruby. If you are
a programmer, I suggest checking out the Java certification books
which if that doesn't make you sick to your stomach, I don't know what
will, but Java has been the most popular language though I don't know
how long that can last and it may be one of those strange things in
life. I have never learned languages through memorization and testing
which was a major turn off for me.

 If you web interest is more front end look and feel stuff, I am not
convinced that you will fall in love with Ruby, but I couldn't say
either way. It is just as good or better than other technologies, but
for me it's the language itself.
Ron F. (Guest)
on 2009-01-07 13:50
(Received via mailing list)
Better job?  Well what sort of job is your ideal?
Larz (Guest)
on 2009-01-07 14:25
(Received via mailing list)
I should also say that basicaly Rails makes it easier to hook in
complex database type of hooks in a well organized programmatic way as
well as complex URL organization. I said what I did previously because
I have worked with PHP developers who either where very resistant to
Rails or just followed managements technology decisions.

 Basically the technologies that compete with Rails are things like
PHP, Java, and maybe Python. Perl is old and provided much of the
inspiration for Ruby. Flash is a different technology that can be tied
into Rails or any of these others, Javascript is a unique browser
language that also works with any of these. Rails can make certain
javascript actions much easier to do. PHP is probably easier to learn
than rails in some ways, but I would say complex web sites in PHP
evolve into what you can call spaghetti code that becomes harder to
manage and I consider PHP to be sort of a hack language, but all in
all it's not that bad. If you find reading about Rails interesting,
maybe go with that as interesting work can be less stressful.
Aaron T. (Guest)
on 2009-01-07 20:43
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Ryan,

Finding a job right now is hard- especially for entry level positions,
and especially for HTML/CSS work since nowadays the programmers are
expected to know enough HTML/CSS that the market for dedicated design
people has dried up for the most part.  At least that's what people
tell me (I'm not really a web/application guy so I don't have any
direct experience).

You've got a few choices IMHO:

1) Learn an up and coming language/solution like Ruby & RoR.  You'll
be competing with fewer people, but there are fewer job opportunities
as well- but companies will still want some experience.

2) Learn an established solution like Java and whatever framework is
popular right now.  You'll be competing with more people (many with a
lot more experience then you will have) but there will be more jobs
available (most of which will want previous experience).

My point is pick something, learn it and use it for something.  Find
an open source project or a non-profit to contribute to and be able to
put that down on your resume and get some people from that
project/non-profit to be a reference for what a great job you did.
You might even look around to find an open source project or
non-profit looking for help first to find out what technology to
learn.

In the end, you'll realize that many of the basic concepts are common
regardless what language/framework you end up learning first.  Things
like MVC,  SQL and OO concepts are pretty universal and in general are
more important to have a solid understanding of then a specific
language/framework.

Good luck,
Aaron

--
Aaron T.
http://synfin.net/
http://tcpreplay.synfin.net/ - Pcap editing and replay tools for Unix &
Windows
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.  -- Benjamin Franklin
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-07 20:55
(Received via mailing list)
Larz wrote:

> Perl is old and provided much of the
> inspiration for Ruby.

In response to that, C and C++ are older than Perl and are always going
to be around and popular (and well used), as is Perl.  Perl provided
the inspiration for PHP (being embedding Perl code in a web page, is
how PHP came about).  It is really hit and miss, some jobs might want
you to know Ruby, or RoR, or C, or C++, or Java, or Perl, or VB, or
Python, or something completely different.  I'm not saying you're
suggesting "Perl is old, so it's not popular" or something, but I've
seen people suggest that, which isn't the case.
Larz (Guest)
on 2009-01-08 18:10
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 7, 1:52 pm, Tim G. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> suggesting "Perl is old, so it's not popular" or something, but I've
> seen people suggest that, which isn't the case.
> --

  There are some perl modules around that maybe do some things ruby
doesn't do, but Ruby is a dynamic language like Perl. C, C++ are
compiled and usefull for embedded dev and many other things ..

 There's always many jobs in older technology for a long time until it
fades away eventually the way of fortran etc. The efficiency factor
may be unsatisfactory ..
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-08 20:06
(Received via mailing list)
Larz wrote:

>> or VB, or Python, or something completely different.  I'm not saying
> may be unsatisfactory ..
At this point, most language debates come down to opinion and
assumption.  I don't believe that Perl is an old language that's going
to fade away, while ruby becomes more popular.  But, that's just my own
view/opinion.  I wasn't saying it because it's more mature and has some
existing modules that maybe don't exist for Ruby or anything.  I might
be wrong about how in demand Perl will or will not be, just like my
opinion abut ruby and other languages.  Neither opinion will make it
more or less likely, so we'll all have to see.  Just remember, there
are plenty of new jobs in Perl, too (not just older code people are
hired to maintain).
Larz (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 03:45
(Received via mailing list)
> hired to maintain).
> --

 There will be work in perl for many years no doubt, before I found
out about ruby I had many perl books and was up in the air if I'd
rather look for work in Java or Perl, but I would characterize perl
this way:


 There's programmers who like to believe ruby is just hype and some
sort of cult and don't want to spend the time to learn something new
or even just find out about it, they have a strong attachment to what
they already know.

  There are many people who have no interest in learning anything new
if they have to spend their own time and money studying it. They will
only learn new things if the company tells them to or sends them to a
class, or maybe if they are desperate and need to find a job.

  Managers who see training people in new things or asking them to
learn new things as something of a problem .. They want to hire people
who have all the skills they need and try to stick with whatever skill
sets their workers already have. People trying to advocate new
technology may be ostracized. I worked with a number of people who
refused to learn perl and wanted to do everything with shell scripts,
and they wrote giant unwieldy ugly shell scripts that where totally
laughable, and yet management accepted their lame explanations of why
it would take them several weeks to get some project to work
correctly. I could not say anything to the contrary as it was all
political and I would have gotten in trouble.

 Then there are sysadmins who write an occasional perl script and have
no real incentive to go beyond that, that may be fairly understandable
as long as they don't have to develop alot of large apps.

 So there maybe alot of legacy perl code out there, and all of the
people mentioned above are not really programmers who have their heart
in programming enough to want to use the best technology and try to
excel towards excellence in development based on object oriented
programming and paradign that's validity can't be denied, though they
will try to anyway.

 Sometimes you are stuck on a machine that the admins won't let you
install what you want to use, but other than that I would never want
to work at a company that wanted to develop some new app in perl.

 If the economy was to be so bad that you had to learn old technology
to get a job, that would seem sad, though the IT industry has all
kinds of ups and downs. One year you might hear college students are
shying away from CS because of the poor IT sector, a few years later
they'll say IT jobs are the future ..
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 04:21
(Received via mailing list)
Larz wrote:

>> like my
>
>
> political and I would have gotten in trouble.
> will try to anyway.
>
>  Sometimes you are stuck on a machine that the admins won't let you
> install what you want to use, but other than that I would never want
> to work at a company that wanted to develop some new app in perl.
>
>  If the economy was to be so bad that you had to learn old technology
> to get a job, that would seem sad, though the IT industry has all
> kinds of ups and downs. One year you might hear college students are
> shying away from CS because of the poor IT sector, a few years later
> they'll say IT jobs are the future ..

Your entire response is based on your own opinions.  I don't recall care
if people like is dislike any certain language, but just like saying
people in other languages claim ruby is all hype, there are those that
buy into the claim that languages like Perl are fading away --
especially when you say things like "I would never want to work at a
company that wanted to develop some new app in perl."  That's
preposterous.  You can replace Perl in that sentence with PHP, C, C++,
Python, Java, etc.  It's all personal view.

In fact, one could say the same thing about another language and use
"ruby" in the example of "never wanting to work at a company that uses
ruby".  The passion, ignorance and arrogance regarding "language wars"
goes both ways.  It's pretty short sighted to call Perl "old
technology" because you happen to like Ruby more.  I don't know why
people can't be more reasonable and less biased.  I prefer Perl, but
I'm not here talking badly about ruby -- I'm here because I use it,
too.  Therefore, there's no reason to get defensive or think you need
to slam another language.  Perl is hardly old, just because it's older.
Ruby has been around for a very long time as well, so I guess by your
logic, it's technically ran its course, too?

Seriously, who cares?  No one said the OP should learn Perl instead of
ruby, and of course there will be support and bias toward ruby, since
this is a ruby group.  It's all about choice and preference.  If you
want to get down to the base of the debate that appears to have evolved
from the question (big surprise there), then people shouldn't be
encouraged to use a different language just because someone else finds
it interesting, or because it is newer (that doesn't make it better).
That's usually the reason why, and people shouldn't drop the idea of
developing a project in languages they know well, just to code in a
newer language someone else is excited about.  The project should be
coded the most efficient, secure and stable as possible, which means
sticking to what you know.  If you know ruby better, use ruby.  If you
have the time and find ruby interesting, learn it anyway.  It never
hurts to get good at something you might not be good at now (in which
case a lot of people could actually benefit from learning Perl, or PHP,
or Java, if they know ruby and have the desire and motivation to learn
something else).

As for legacy code, there are a lot of languages that have legacy code,
some not very good -- and that includes ruby.  Some people can code
well and some can not.  Some people abandon code and some do not.  I
really fail to see how one has to do with another.  If you like heavy
OO type programming languages, then yeah, ruby would probably suit you
better than Perl or PHP.  If you don't agree or don't care, then there
are a lot of other languages that work equally as well, which aren't
going anywhere.  In closing, check the statistics and there are a lot
more larger sites that most people online use daily that are developed
in Perl (yes, new code developed today and more yesterday), being so
much for your theory that you'd not work for any company that developed
new applications in Perl.  You may as well denounce any new
applications coded in Python, PHP, C, C++, Java, too.  I get it, you
like ruby, you don't care for Perl, that's fine with me, but keep the
claims on level and fair.  There's no anti-ruby witch hunting in this
thread, so practice what you preach.  Since no one's coming up with
untrue reasons why ruby isn't for them, why state your opinion about
Perl as being factual?  Don't be so closed minded that you trash talk
languages you don't agree with, because it makes you no better than the
Perl programmers you mention whom unfairly trash talk ruby.  They are
both good languages and neither are going anywhere.
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 04:25
(Received via mailing list)
Tim G. wrote:

> Your entire response is based on your own opinions.  I don't recall
> care if people like is dislike any certain language,

Wow, I can't type at all today.

That should say "I don't really care if people like or dislike"... guh.
Larz (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 05:10
(Received via mailing list)
> Your entire response is based on your own opinions.  I don't recall care
> if people like is dislike any certain language, but just like saying
> people in other languages claim ruby is all hype, there are those that
> buy into the claim that languages like Perl are fading away --
> especially when you say things like "I would never want to work at a
> company that wanted to develop some new app in perl."  That's
> preposterous.  You can replace Perl in that sentence with PHP, C, C++,
> Python, Java, etc.  It's all personal view.

 It's my opinion when I am an employee, when management makes a
decision, then it's not just an opinion, it's what you get stuck
with.

> Ruby has been around for a very long time as well, so I guess by your
> logic, it's technically ran its course, too?

 It's only old because object oriented programming is an important
modern paradigm. I look it maybe like archery is old, guns are newer.
That maybe not a good example because I like archery, but in a real
war you'd have to go with a gun. OO enables you to write larger apps
that fit together more easily if you design the app correctly. Some
languages are older in that sense, but maybe it's not worth arguing
about as if you are a programmer you might be biased and many people
are ..




> coded the most efficient, secure and stable as possible, which means
> sticking to what you know.  If you know ruby better, use ruby.  If you
> have the time and find ruby interesting, learn it anyway.  It never
> hurts to get good at something you might not be good at now (in which
> case a lot of people could actually benefit from learning Perl, or PHP,
> or Java, if they know ruby and have the desire and motivation to learn
> something else).

I can't argue with that except everyone may have their own agenda. You
might find it frustrating to learn something newer, but it's not just
newer in that it was just invented, presumably languages are
advancing ..




> much for your theory that you'd not work for any company that developed
> new applications in Perl.  You may as well denounce any new
> applications coded in Python, PHP, C, C++, Java, too.

 C, C++ are well suited for embedded and compiled apps, Java has it's
place as well.


> I get it, you
> like ruby, you don't care for Perl, that's fine with me, but keep the
> claims on level and fair.  There's no anti-ruby witch hunting in this
> thread, so practice what you preach.  Since no one's coming up with
> untrue reasons why ruby isn't for them, why state your opinion about
> Perl as being factual?  Don't be so closed minded that you trash talk
> languages you don't agree with, because it makes you no better than the
> Perl programmers you mention whom unfairly trash talk ruby.  They are
> both good languages and neither are going anywhere.

 There are no doubt some highly talented and smart people that use
Perl, it's not that perl is irrelevant, I didn't say that. Ruby will
someday peak out as well ..
List R. (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 05:14
(Received via mailing list)
Too long, didn't read
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 06:40
(Received via mailing list)
Larz wrote:

>
>  It's my opinion when I am an employee, when management makes a
> decision, then it's not just an opinion, it's what you get stuck
> with.

You said you wouldn't want to work with a company that developed new
applications in Perl.  That has nothing to do with management, it has
to do with your opinion about Perl.  That's fine, but you used it as a
basis to say Perl was old technology.

>> too.  Therefore, there's no reason to get defensive or think you need
>> to slam another language.  Perl is hardly old, just because it's
>> older. Ruby has been around for a very long time as well, so I guess
>> by your logic, it's technically ran its course, too?
>
>  It's only old because object oriented programming is an important
> modern paradigm.

OO existed before Perl, before PHP, before Python, Java, Ruby, etc.  Not
everything needs to be OO to be modern or worth using.

> I look it maybe like archery is old, guns are newer.

That's a poor analogy.

> That maybe not a good example because I like archery, but in a real
> war you'd have to go with a gun.

Then we're talking about different gun brands.  They all shoot.

> OO enables you to write larger apps
> that fit together more easily if you design the app correctly.

And if you design correctly, it doesn't have to be OO to fit together
easily.  Of course, I'm not debating the merits of OO.  I even said if
you want OO, ruby is a better choice than Perl.  So, what's the
argument about?

> Some
> languages are older in that sense, but maybe it's not worth arguing
> about as if you are a programmer you might be biased and many people
> are ..

Everyone's "biased" to their own opinions.  You're biased about yours.
I'm actually not being biased.  Factually, ruby is better for OO.  You
act like Perl is old news.  It's always being developed.  I'm not
trying to sell you on it, I don't care, but it's a falsehood to claim
it's some old technology that's a mistake to code in.  That's
ridiculous.  To you, it's not a good fit, that's fine.  Why not just
say that, instead of acting like your view is absolute?

>> better). That's usually the reason why, and people shouldn't drop the
>> learn something else).
>
> I can't argue with that except everyone may have their own agenda.

They may, and may not.

> You
> might find it frustrating to learn something newer,

No, I don't.

> but it's not just
> newer in that it was just invented, presumably languages are
> advancing ..

And Perl 6 is being developed as we speak.  Ruby is also being
developed.  They are both alive.


>> aren't
>> going anywhere.  In closing, check the statistics and there are a lot
>> more larger sites that most people online use daily that are
>> developed in Perl (yes, new code developed today and more yesterday),
>> being so much for your theory that you'd not work for any company
>> that developed
>> new applications in Perl.  You may as well denounce any new
>> applications coded in Python, PHP, C, C++, Java, too.
>
>  C, C++ are well suited for embedded and compiled apps, Java has it's
> place as well.

As ruby has its place, as PHP as its place, as Python has its place.

>
>  There are no doubt some highly talented and smart people that use
> Perl, it's not that perl is irrelevant, I didn't say that. Ruby will
> someday peak out as well ..

Okay, fair enough.  I got the impression you were making a claim that
Perl is on a definite and indefinite downturn, as if it as some old
archaic language that people shouldn't waste time with, and should
instead use ruby.  I apologize if I misunderstood your intent or
meaning.
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 06:41
(Received via mailing list)
List.rb wrote:

> Too long, didn't read
>

So, you "top post" in reply and quote the entire text that was "too long
to read"?  Thanks for the sarcastic contribution, especially in
response to something you didn't bother reading.  I wonder why someone
not interested in reading, is on a usenet group that the posts are in
text?
Randy K. (Guest)
on 2009-01-09 19:00
(Received via mailing list)
On Thursday 08 January 2009 10:13 pm, List.rb wrote:
> Too long, didn't read

Well, I'm glad you quoted the whole thing, at least. ;-)

Randy K.
Ilan B. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 00:05
unknown wrote:
> Hello, I am from the USA and I graduated last year with a BS. I've
> been trying to find a job doing HTML and CSS or Flash, but to no
> avail. I know finding a job will be hard, but I want to give myself
> the best chance of success.


Ryan,

I feel for you, I had a similar situation in '93 during a recession.  I
had a Mech Eng degree and no chance in h*ll of getting a job as everyone
was laying off. I just bit the bullet, dropped mechanical and agreed to
write assembly for RISC chips which was incredibly boring but at least
it was a job.  At that time it was an easier market to break into and I
had to stick with it for 2-3 years before I branched into C++ (for about
10 years), java, and then finally Ruby..

I have interviewed many candidates and if they have ever contributed to
open source projects then I am pretty confident about getting them on
board.  Most companies just want a self reliant adaptable go-getter that
works well within teams and if you worked on open source then you
already have everything they want.

hth and keep your head up as it was really easy to get discouraged..

Another option is to wait out the recession while doing your masters..
No matter what they tell you, it won't hurt your possibility of landing
a gig.

Ohh.. check your local job listings to see the hot languages in your
area but safer still is to learn the languages that you enjoy as that
aspect will come across in your interviews..

join linkedin.. very good service..

keep your resume brief and mention the buzzwords to get through the HR
round.

ilan
Albert S. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 00:50
Tim G. wrote:
> I got the impression you were making a claim that
> Perl is [...] some old archaic language that people
> shouldn't waste time with

13 years ago I was programming in Perl (v5). I loved it. Until I had to
return a file handle from a function.
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 00:55
(Received via mailing list)
Albert S. wrote:

> Tim G. wrote:
>> I got the impression you were making a claim that
>> Perl is [...] some old archaic language that people
>> shouldn't waste time with
>
> 13 years ago I was programming in Perl (v5). I loved it. Until I had
> to return a file handle from a function.

Honestly, I'm okay with people not liking one language over another.  As
for returning a file handle from a function, you could do that, but
maybe it was not a method you agreed with using (or maybe you weren't
sure how)?  Anyway, if any language doesn't do what someone wants (or
how they want), I can very much see their reasons for using one that
agrees with them more.  That's totally cool with me.
Albert S. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 02:02
Tim G. wrote:
> Albert S. wrote:
>
>> Tim G. wrote:
>>> I got the impression you were making a claim that
>>> Perl is [...] some old archaic language that people
>>> shouldn't waste time with
>>
>> 13 years ago I was programming in Perl (v5). I loved it. Until I had
>> to return a file handle from a function.
>
[...]
> As for returning a file handle from a function, you could do that, but
> maybe it was not a method you agreed with using

I was referring to the \*HANDLE syntax. I didn't understand it. At that
time it was important for me to understand exactly what was happening
under the hood because I was trying to use Perl as a study aid for an
Operating System course. I didn't want my file handles dup(2)licating
around. The manual page gave this syntax as some "voodoo".

Same story for Perl's OO. I wasn't a big fun of this methodology back
then, but many libraries used it so I had to understand what happens
under the hood to really master this language. There wasn't any material
on the net explaining how Perl implements its OO. That's very different
from Ruby, where you can find diagrams explaining exactly how its OO is
implemented.

When I read some parts of Perl's man pages I get the feeling they wink
at me saying "ha ha! ha ha! use this syntax. Why? Oh, that's complicate
to explain. Tim knows, Tim knows. Or buy the Holy book of the Camel, the
masters are explaining it there. ha ha!"

They even discourage you from looking at Perl's source code. "Beware all
ye who enter here". "There's no BNF, just paw your way through the...".
That's very different from Ruby where I, a relative newbie, can easily
read its source code and benefit from it.
Albert S. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 02:05
Earlier I wrote:
>
> When I read some parts of Perl's man pages I get the feeling they wink
> at me saying "ha ha! ha ha! use this syntax. Why? Oh, that's complicate
> to explain. Tim knows, Tim knows. Or buy the Holy book of the Camel, the
> masters are explaining it there. ha ha!"

Oops, pardon me. I didn't notice your name too is Tim. I was referring
here to one Tim famous in the Perl community. Well, actually I'm not
sure that was his name, it was a long time ago.
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 02:10
(Received via mailing list)
Albert S. wrote:

>>
>
> the Camel, the masters are explaining it there. ha ha!"
>
> They even discourage you from looking at Perl's source code. "Beware
> all ye who enter here". "There's no BNF, just paw your way through
> the...". That's very different from Ruby where I, a relative newbie,
> can easily read its source code and benefit from it.

Perl's OO isn't that great, still, and definitely wasn't back then.
And, believe me, I don't know everything about any single language (if
I did, I'd be somewhere else right now :-)  As for ruby, it pretty much
makes about the same sense as Perl or PHP code does in my view.  Such
as, once you get used to the syntax and functions, you're pretty much
good to go, but there's always more involved aspects of any language.
Considering Perl 13 years ago, I definitely can understand your
grievances, and even OO Perl now isn't so hot.  However, I'm not a huge
fan of OO just for the same of the methods used (not that I'm against
it either), so that doesn't bother me personally.  If I wanted a better
OO language, I'd definitely not be using Perl either.  I can take or
leave it, personally, so I enjoy many languages.  Anyone that's a fan
of OO, I can see much more preferring the syntax of Ruby or Python,
etc.  No disagreements there.
Tim G. (Guest)
on 2009-01-13 02:15
(Received via mailing list)
Albert S. wrote:

> Earlier I wrote:
>>
>> When I read some parts of Perl's man pages I get the feeling they
>> wink at me saying "ha ha! ha ha! use this syntax. Why? Oh, that's
>> complicate to explain. Tim knows, Tim knows. Or buy the Holy book of
>> the Camel, the masters are explaining it there. ha ha!"
>
> Oops, pardon me. I didn't notice your name too is Tim. I was referring
> here to one Tim famous in the Perl community. Well, actually I'm not
> sure that was his name, it was a long time ago.

No, no, that's me... (just kidding).  I thought you were being humorous.
The names that pop out to me are Larry (Wall), Randal (Schwartz), Tom
(Christiansen, and Phoenix), Tim (Bunce), and, actually many others.
Not including people that think they are the authority, that probably
wouldn't be considered as such. lol  Regardless, I get what you mean.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.