Bruce Eckel and Ruby

Timothy H. wrote:

Well, never let it be said that I was foolish enough to argue with Jim
Weirich :slight_smile:

Sigh, now if I could only convince my kids of this. :slight_smile:


– Jim W.

Austin Z. wrote:

poopyheads.
If you read that article a little carefully, Bruce Eckel is mad about
Bruce Tate ignoring Python in “Beyond Java”. And he has a point. Python
has been a good alternative to Java for years. And it still is.

And in my oppinion Bruce Eckel could be more valuable asset to the Ruby
community that Bruce Tate, since Bruce Tate is just spreading FUD to
sell books in my oppinion, but still … doesn’t have time to
investigate Python which is THE traditional alternative to Java.

I really hope Bruce Eckel changes his mind and releases a “Thinking in
Ruby” book.
That would be awesome.

An interesting article. I didn’t read it as being con ruby. Just
reiterating what we all know about not understanding a problem until
you’ve implemented the solution at least once before.

In article [email protected],
Austin Z. [email protected] wrote:

poopyheads.

Frankly, I don’t want Mr Eckel to become a Ruby programmer (and say
so on the blog entry I linked to earlier); he’s likely to find all
sorts of “flaws” that are in fact features that I love about Ruby.
Similarly, a lot of the “features” he finds in Python I consider
flaws. He won’t be happy in Ruby, so he shouldn’t use it.

Oh, now that’s going a bit over the top don’t you think? I would think
that
we should actually encourage Mr. Eckel to try out Ruby. We should
welcome him
to instead of hanging out a sign that says “No Eckel’s allowed!”.
Afterall,
we’re the friendly language newsgroup. If Mr. Eckel comes here with
questions
I would hope that we would welcome him and answer them courteously (and
no
“see I told you so” type responses either).

Better to win friends than to make enemies.

Phil

In article [email protected],
Hal F. [email protected] wrote:

Robert H. wrote:

I think that if you think Bruce Eckel is threatened by Ruby then you
need to read about Bruce Eckel. He is only asking “why”.

I didn’t say he was threatened. But I think “why” is ultimately a
matter of taste.

Right, but Eckel seemed to be suggesting that one must use a much more
objective, almost scientific method for lanauge selection (and implied
that
Tate relied too much on ‘preference’). In doing so he seemed to imply
that
people who had chosen Python had gone through this objective, scientific
process while those who were headed in the direction of Ruby had not.

It doesn’t seem mysterious to me that different languages appeal to
different people.

Agreed, however, it seems that for many years now that there have been
some
doubts about whether there is room for two (seemingly similar)open
source,
dynamic, OO languages which largely appeal to the same developer base.
This may actually be at the root of the animosity between the two camps:
perhaps we each have a sneaking suspicion that if we could get the good
developers from the other camp to come to ours we would be able to get a
lot
further (in development of libraries, docs, VMs etc.). A couple of
years ago
Ruby was the underdog, but now in terms of mindshare I think Ruby and
Python are
close to parity. If the momentum continues then Ruby ‘mindshare’ could
outpace Python mindshare and perhaps begin to attract Python developers.
That
may be seen as worrisome to some in the Python camp including Eckel.
The
underlying message (reading between the lines) of some of Eckel’s
comments
about Ruby seems to be a message for the Python faithful to remain in
the
fold.

While on the surface there seems to be a religious conflict between the
two
groups, perhaps what’s really going on is a competition for resources
where
resources in this case are developers.

Phil

Phil T. wrote:

Oh, now that’s going a bit over the top don’t you think? I would think that
we should actually encourage Mr. Eckel to try out Ruby. We should welcome him
to instead of hanging out a sign that says “No Eckel’s allowed!”. Afterall,
we’re the friendly language newsgroup. If Mr. Eckel comes here with questions
I would hope that we would welcome him and answer them courteously (and no
“see I told you so” type responses either).

Sure. But he’s been railing against Ruby for five years now (unless I am
miscounting). When exactly would you expect him to try it?

Besides, his negative attitude seems to indicate he thinks he already
has
tried it, or why would he be so opposed to it?

Hal

In article [email protected],
Hal F. [email protected] wrote:

Sure. But he’s been railing against Ruby for five years now (unless I am
miscounting). When exactly would you expect him to try it?

I’m not expecting him to at this point, however I don’t think we should
post a
“keep out Bruce Eckel and this means you!” sign as was suggested by the
other
poster.

Besides, his negative attitude seems to indicate he thinks he already has
tried it, or why would he be so opposed to it?

Perhaps he has. However, I noticed from reading his rant that he
mentions
Rails and then goes on about Python’s contenders and mentions Zope and
concludes that Zope is just too complicated. Then he says that he would
use
PHP5 for his web programming needs (skipping entirely over Rails it
seems - he
doesn’t seem to want to even touch it).

At any rate, if Eckel is our Grinch then perhaps we should smother him
in
kindness :wink: Invite him to speak at RubyConf, or something like that.
Could be interesting. Basically, I’m thinking that perhaps we should
try to
move him out of the ‘enemy’ column and into the ‘friend’ column. If we
attack him for attacking us then we’ll get nowhere.

Phil

In article [email protected],
bonefry [email protected] wrote:

in perhaps as hostile a way as he can without saying that Rubyists are

I really hope Bruce Eckel changes his mind and releases a “Thinking in
Ruby” book.
That would be awesome.

Indeed that would be awesome. The more Ruby books the better. And when
people see someone embrace something that they formerly criticized that
definitely gets people interested (see St. Paul :slight_smile:

So maybe we should be inviting Mr. Eckel over to try out Ruby for a
while.
“Come on in, the water’s fine!”

Phil

Phil T. wrote:

I’m not expecting him to at this point, however I don’t think we should post a
“keep out Bruce Eckel and this means you!” sign as was suggested by the other
poster.

I don’t think anyone seriously suggested that.

At any rate, if Eckel is our Grinch then perhaps we should smother him in
kindness :wink: Invite him to speak at RubyConf, or something like that.
Could be interesting. Basically, I’m thinking that perhaps we should try to
move him out of the ‘enemy’ column and into the ‘friend’ column. If we
attack him for attacking us then we’ll get nowhere.

I’m not interested in attacking him, and I hope no one else is. I’d be
as happy to see him here as I would anyone else.

Hal

On Dec 20, 2005, at 8:57 PM, Phil T. wrote:

While on the surface there seems to be a religious conflict between
the two
groups, perhaps what’s really going on is a competition for
resources where
resources in this case are developers.

This is an interesting point that deserves some consideration. This
has more than once crossed my mind.

I’ve got a few thoughts on this but can’t quite express them
intelligibly yet. I suspect some of you will have no problems at all :slight_smile:

Phil


Bob H. – blogs at http://www.recursive.ca/hutch/
Recursive Design Inc. – http://www.recursive.ca/
Raconteur – http://www.raconteur.info/

On 20/12/05, Phil T. [email protected] wrote:

flaws. He won’t be happy in Ruby, so he shouldn’t use it.
Oh, now that’s going a bit over the top don’t you think? I would
think that we should actually encourage Mr. Eckel to try out Ruby. We
should welcome him to instead of hanging out a sign that says “No
Eckel’s allowed!”. After all, we’re the friendly language newsgroup.
If Mr. Eckel comes here with questions I would hope that we would
welcome him and answer them courteously (and no “see I told you so”
type responses either).

Better to win friends than to make enemies.

Phil, I think you’re misreading what I wrote. If I thought that Mr Eckel
would use and like Ruby, I’d want him in our camp. But based on reading
a lot of his railing against Ruby in the time that I’ve been a
Rubyist, Ruby would make him very unhappy as a developer.

We don’t need – or want – people who use Ruby because they have to. We
want people who use Ruby because it truly makes them happy. I’ve known
some developers who are happier than pigs in shit when they’re
programming in C or C++. Ruby would make them very unhappy.

Why, exactly, should we encourage them to use Ruby? I’m not wanting to
make Ruby an exclusive club. I’m wanting people to find the same joy
that I find in Ruby; if they’re not going to find it in Ruby, they
should find it in a language that makes them happier.

-austin

On 12/21/05, Austin Z. [email protected] wrote:

We want people who use Ruby because it truly makes them
happy. I’ve known some developers who are happier than
pigs in sh*t when they’re programming in C or C++. Ruby
would make them very unhappy.

Does this get quote of the week?

gabriele renzi [email protected] writes:

actually, I still think bustrofedic, or whatever it is spelled in
english, still is the best writing system ever. Start top left then go
right, one line down then go left and so on

I don’t think the idea is as clever as you think, for example, how can
dnA( ?asrev-eciv ro thgir-ot-tfel morf daer ot deen uoy fi tceted uoy
how will the computer?) Actually, I can’t see of a good reason to do
.yllaunam etirw uoy fi ssel dnah ruoy gnivom naht rehto ti

More information at:
lmth.nodehportsuob/B/lmth/nograj/rse~/gro.btac.www//:ptth

Hal F. [email protected] wrote:

In fact, I am not opposed to learning both. At the moment
I haven’t time, but later maybe I will. It’s a language, not
a religion.

I’m tried both as well. In fact, I was directed to ruby by
a poster on c.l.py…

His use of “hyperenthusiast” is interesting. Does it apply
only to non-Python people?

He probably means “fanboy”, but was put off by Python’s “one and
only one reasonable way” of doing things. :slight_smile:

As for the “Ruby has better OO” argument – Pythonists call it
FUD, but it appears simple common sense (from what Python I’ve
seen). But I think a large part of that is that Ruby and
Python are evolutionarily different. I’ve heard – this may
be wrong – that Python’s OO descends from Modula-3 or some
such. I can’t comment. I do know that it seems less OO than
Ruby to me (or Java, C++, Object Pascal).

I’m tempted to join in the “Python OO is weak” chant. But your
last point, that they are simply different approaches, is valid,
and I shall refrain… for now.

As for significant whitespace – surely it’s a matter of
opinion whether this is the “right” way or not. One can make
arguments in both directions. I was initially drawn to the
idea, but after playing with it, I found it had its drawbacks.

There are two things that I think python got absolutely right:
One is Python’s ternary expressions (“if 0 < x < 10:”), which
have functional equivalents in Ruby. The other is significant
whitespace.

I think this has to do with the fact that Python, being derived
from an educational language, imposes educational practices on
its code; it’s also quite possible that if modern educational
languages focused more on actually teaching good practices and
style, and less on making sure they use the latest GUI toolkit
endorsed by Microsoft/Sun, I wouldn’t have such a strong opinion
on the matter.

Most (human) languages are written left to right. Are Arabic
and Hebrew “wrong” because they aren’t?

puts "#$your_way sucks" unless
    $your_way.equal?( $my_way )   # :)

That said,

I’ve been a Ruby hobbyist for about 4 or 5 years now, and I had
no idea what “Rails” was until recently. I knew that traffic in
c.l.r had more than tripled in recent months, and that instead
of the normal Ruby idiom/syntax/language questions, I started
seeing a lot of configuration questions about some application
framework apparently based on ruby.

I’m glad ruby is getting the attention I believe it deserves.
And I’ve seen some exciting things happen in the core language.
But Rails is a framework. Ruby is a language. Many dozens of
developers churn out Rails applications without ever really
knowing much more than tutorial-level Ruby. And as a web
development framework, it can’t escape being a fad. Some fads
fade into obscurity (ASP, HTML::Mason, or gasp Zope), and some
fade into oblivion (ColdFusion). Even PHP’s seeming Golden Age
will eventually pass, and either pass its torch, or burn out.

I’ve played with Rails, and find it fascinating. And hopefully
it will grow and evolve and influence technology, and we will
learn and benefit, but it will fade. I only hope Ruby doesn’t
invest all of itself in this trend and fade with it.

You could all spend another 20-30 post thread psychoanalyzing my
article and extrapolating information about how I was abused by
Zope as a child, or we could get back to what brought us here
originally, which is having fun with a great language and the
great tools it brings with it.

My USD$0.05,
Tim H.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Christian N. wrote:

             as well)

actually, I still think bustrofedic, or whatever it is spelled in
english, still is the best writing system ever. Start top left then go
right, one line down then go left and so on

I don’t think the idea is as clever as you think, for example, how can
dnA( ?asrev-eciv ro thgir-ot-tfel morf daer ot deen uoy fi tceted uoy
how will the computer?) Actually, I can’t see of a good reason to do
.yllaunam etirw uoy fi ssel dnah ruoy gnivom naht rehto ti

The tactile writing system known as Moon was designed to work like
that. It had guide lines like giant parentheses joining line ends
to show you the flow. RNIB removed this feature because they wanted
it to be more like print. Moon is more bulky than braille, but this
was one really good feature in its favour.

More information at:
lmth.nodehportsuob/B/lmth/nograj/rse~/gro.btac.www//:ptth

Christian N. [email protected] http://chneukirchen.org

    Hugh

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 07:31:30AM +0900, Jeff W. wrote:

That’s all the end … at least they are BOTH taking away from the Perl
community & the other static/compiled languages out there …

What’s up with the “hate Perl and static languages” routine? I like
Perl, and I still use Perl. Both Perl and Ruby coexist quite happily in
my skillset.


Chad P. [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

unix virus: If you’re using a unixlike OS, please forward
this to 20 others and erase your system partition.

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 09:08:45AM +0900, Jim W. wrote:

Mr. Eckel is a strong critic of Java, particularly in the area of
In short, to accuse him of being short sighted with respect to other
languages because he has a vested interest in teaching Java needs to
ignore the fact that he never been slow to critisize Java in the past
when he sees problems.

And finally, his blog entry is less about supporting Java, and more
asking the question of why Ruby over Python.

I think there’s a middle ground here:

It looks to me like the way Eckel is approaching this, he sees what he
perceives to be an overreaction to Ruby, and is overreacting to it in
turn. He doesn’t seem interested in learning for himself what there is
to like about Ruby over Python, just in making a case against the
statements he’s already seen about what there is to like about it.

Like I said, a little overreaction, I think. If there are Ruby
hyperenthusiasts, he seems to be a Ruby hypoenthusiast.


Chad P. [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

unix virus: If you’re using a unixlike OS, please forward
this to 20 others and erase your system partition.

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 06:12:53AM +0900, Jamey C. wrote:

James B. wrote:

Besides, we should be ranting about how Ruby is better than Lisp.

:slight_smile:

Ruby kicks Cobol’s ass!

So much for controversy.


Chad P. [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

unix virus: If you’re using a unixlike OS, please forward
this to 20 others and erase your system partition.

On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 06:17:48PM +0900, Tim H. wrote:

There are two things that I think python got absolutely right:
One is Python’s ternary expressions (“if 0 < x < 10:”), which
have functional equivalents in Ruby. The other is significant
whitespace.

Glad ya think so. I find it obnoxious, and it contributes to an
appearance to the source that makes my eyes bleed. It detracts from
visual symmetry and makes everything look unfinished to me.

That’s just me, though – just like your impression that it’s “right” is
just you.


Chad P. [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

unix virus: If you’re using a unixlike OS, please forward
this to 20 others and erase your system partition.

Bruce Eckel is just goodselling-books-maker rather than guru for coders.