Those who think RubyLanguage
is so great but have never used SmalltalkLanguage
or other powerful but less-popular ObjectOrientedLanguage
s and so don't have any real basis for comparison.
core team seems pretty damn smug.
Signs of a Ruby Weenie:
- "EverythingIsAnObject!" - (except that lots of things don't conform to the normal behavuour of objects. Ruby is tiresome like that.)
- "Ruby has OpenClasses?!"
- "Ruby has blocks!"
- "Ruby has method_missing!"
- "In Rails you say 5.days.ago!" (Sticking arbitrary methods in places speaks volumes about cuteness mattering more than the disorganisation.)
- "We added 18 new features in 2 days!"
!": Evidence of a background in JavaLanguage
and its JavaPrimitiveTypesDiscussion
issues. Leads to excitement over "In Rails you say 5.days.ago!"
"Ruby has OpenClasses?
, and undoubtedly others.
"Ruby has blocks!" [BlocksInRuby
]: Indicates unfamiliarity with SmallTalk
s, inside-out FunctionalProgramming
"Ruby has method_missing!": Indicates unfamiliarity with PythonLanguage
, perhaps others. See DoesNotUnderstand
"In Rails you say 5.days.ago!": Indicates unfamiliarity with ForthLanguage
and conflating peculiar features of Ruby syntax with EverythingIsAnObject
"We added 18 new features in 2 days!" A sure sign we are familiar with commercial platforms marketed to the "Enterprise".
...or maybe that just indicates unfamiliarity with another language that has all
those things, i.e. SmalltalkLanguage
. Or, better, a popular
language that has all those things, e.g... maybe, PerlLanguage
? Why is it smug to mention that a language has a feature set
other languages don't?
The trouble is not "mentioning" language features but jumping up and down about them as if no other languages have them or RubyLanguage does them so much better... all because RubyOnRails is like crack (I hear) compared to JavaTwoEnterpriseEdition, JakartaProject, ZopeApplicationServer, DjangoProject, WebObjects, or whatever.
You've totally departed from the discussion by rejecting the practical use of the tool. You're simply identifying any advantages of Ruby as weenie-isms, for reasons I can't determine. As I'm trying to explain, these are benefits of Ruby
because Ruby can be used
in environments that require technologies used to be fairly popular. You seem not to understand the situation of people who have to do real work
Thank you. You seem not to understand the situation of disabled people who have to live on the dole. But work and money aside, I am not "simply identifying any advantages of Ruby as weenie-isms." Someone at the top of the page defined SmugRubyWeenies as people who think Ruby is really great because they know no powerful languages to compare it to. I am trying to illustrate that definition by quoting a thrilled Rails programmer I know in real face-to-face life, someone who is not aware of other languages sharing the RubyLanguage features he extols.
Smalltalk is so frequently mentioned in the presence of Ruby it doesn't make sense to me for the enthusiasts not to know about it, but I'll take your word for it. As for the definition, I guess I would agree with it a great deal more if the word "powerful" was replaced with the superset "useful", but I was
missing what you were getting at.
got into Smalltalk after Ruby, if that makes your day any brighter. I started writing a Settlers of Catan clone on my last trip away from the internet.
Hacknot bemoans the "Invasion of the Dynamic Language Weenies" (primarily RubyLanguage
but also PythonLanguage
) at http://www.hacknot.info/hacknot/action/showEntry?eid=93
The author responds to a bunch of assertions about dynamic languages by making some other random assertion. See SweepingGeneralizations in the article like "Any claim that a DL has a more natural syntax that another language is just an attempt to elevate one personal preference over another," or "This is just an example of one language community in action, but the same observations hold true for any other language community you might name." It looks to me like the author is just flaming. --JesseMillikan
Most of my problems with ruby aren't language problems - I can (okay, mostly) avoid the pitfalls with lots of discipline & team agreement. The biggest problem I face is the lack of discipline in other people's gems. Just because you can metaprogram and monkey patch doesn't mean you have to make a virtue of doing it as much as possible!
Maybe it suffers Lisp's problem: it's too powerful for team-centric programming. Issues of discipline and coordination tend to override coding productivity past a certain project size.
is someone who thinks that Rails was the last significant problem remaining to be solved in computer science.
But does anybody actually think that small? Seriously? People being obsessed with a particular tech or niche I can understand - which might be described here but this "last significant problem in CS" phrase sounds like a straw man to me.
Ruby does not have method_missing! but it does have method_missing. The good news, method_missing will catch your method_missing! ;)