Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 01:05:07 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> To: Tom Evans <tevans.uk@googlemail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SoC Message-ID: <464969B3.3050306@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <1179214317.1791.38.camel@zoot.mintel.co.uk> References: <20070513040651.GB1017@dwpc.dwlabs.ca> <4647F627.7020408@u.washington.edu> <20070514202922.GF1017@dwpc.dwlabs.ca> <4649426F.8050601@u.washington.edu> <1179214317.1791.38.camel@zoot.mintel.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Tom Evans wrote: > On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 22:17 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> Ruby's nice, but it's built on Perl so I have suspicions on its overall >> usability / speed given my experience with Perl over the past 4 months >> daily for work :(.. Ruby's just the new big thing for programming >> languages, so everyone's into it. Kind of like how Java was compared to >> C/C++ a few years back. But once everything dies down people will >> realize that they'll still have to program in C/C++/Perl for real-world >> applications. >> >> Python seems better than Ruby from what I can see, but I really don't >> like the mandatory indentation thing. Ew.. >> > > Rubies are better Perls. That's the only connection between the two. One > day, a Japanese programmer got fed up with Perl, and wrote a better > language (for varying meanings of better). > > Its not based or built on Perl in any respect. > > Python and Ruby both have the same targets; to speed development time > and increase programmer productivity. But one must make a Perl before one can make a Ruby. Maybe that was what I was trying to aim for. Ruby's nice, but it seems like it's going to be a bit passe in a few years like Java was for compilable / interpretable languages. -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?464969B3.3050306>