Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

blog.peepcode.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 247 posts

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#81

Post by d0mine »

patio11 wrote: post #39
sreque wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really have to switch from one to another? I learned both languages, love them both, and use them both. There's too much hate in the world of programming languages.

The fights are so vicious because the stakes are so small. (Originally said about academics, but works for programmers, too.)

Sayer's Law: "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the stakes at issue." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre%27s_Law

Special case in programming -- "colour of the bikeshed" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_Law_of_Triviality

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#82

Post by brutimus »

mclin wrote: post #45
DanielStraight wrote: post #2

I think this is a good explanation of some of the very real differences between Python and Ruby. The lambda issue is almost enough to get me back to Ruby after switching to Python. I stick with Python mostly because of syntax (especially significant whitespace) and the batteries-included philosophy. I'm also in love with a Python library called pyparsing, the equivalent of which I haven't seen in any other language.

I'm not sure I get the lambda issue. If you want a > 1 line lambda why not just define a function? def a(x): def b(): print x return b Not sure what a prototypical ruby usecase would be.

I don't understand the argument either.. I use multi-line lambdas with ifs and forloops all the time.

  f = lambda x:(
    x if (
      x**2 > 10 or x**2

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#83

Post by steveklabnik »

tghw wrote: post #60
steveklabnik wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For something like RSpec, you can't monkey-patch in Object#should.

Are you saying this because you can't monkey-patch literals? Because you can very much monkey-patch everything else in Python.

As far as I know, Python doesn't have open classes, right?

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#84

Post by nfnaaron »

"The Seattle Python community represented there was almost painfully polite. ... I later learned that this may be an attribute unique to Seattle Python developers."

When I lived in Seattle, I read that musicians, playing in PNW clubs and venues and noticing a lower audience energy level than they were used to, sometimes had to be reassured by club owners that yes, the audience really does like you, really, it's just that PNW audiences are more subdued, laid back and polite.

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#85

Post by mcav »

drmock wrote: post #73
mcav wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between "why aren't you using Python?" and "why aren't you following standard Python coding conventions?".

Ah, I see. So what you are tying to say is that the non-stop bashing of Perl, PHP and Ruby from Python developers should be interpreted as just a friendly "if [you don't like python], no worries." After all, one would have to be a "Rube (that's what [Ruby developers are] called, right?)" to think that Python developers aren't friendly to people who don't worship Python.

Nah. Anecdotes are anecdotes.

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#86

Post by steveklabnik »

pavelludiq wrote: post #32
steveklabnik wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Neither python nor ruby are lisp. You may or may not agree, but you'll probably be interested in Why Ruby is an acceptable Lisp: http://www.randomhacks.net/articles/2005/12/03/why-ruby-is-a... Covered on HN previously here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=416589

Yes, i have read that article. Here is my humble opinion: Having 80% of the expressibility, even if you don't need the other 20% that often, does not make you lisp. Which is why the title is not "Why ruby is lisp", but uses the word "acceptable". Its just semantics, and i don't want to argue about what makes something lisp, it wasn't even my main point.

I think "Why Ruby is Good Enough" makes for a better title, I'd agree. I don't think Ruby is Lisp either, I just felt that it went along with your point, that's all.

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#87

Post by kushaura »

smokinn wrote: post #52
gsiener wrote: post #5

Not related to the article, but I really like the setting and layout of the top section. Felt like I was reading a magazine!

Something weird is happening in that layout though. Maybe it's just Chrome/Webkit but if you double click anywhere a grid overlays itself onto the page. It seems to be on purpose ( background-image: url( http://blog.peepcode.com/images/grid/27px-leading-w-60-80-gr... ); ) but it seems quite bizarre.

from the bottom of the page: "Double-click anywhere on this page to see our typographical & layout grid above."

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#88

Post by drmock »

berntb wrote: post #50
patio11 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fights are so vicious because the stakes are so small. (Originally said about academics, but works for programmers, too.)

I have the definitive impression that the Pythonistas are more interested in this fighting than most other language cultures. I might be wrong, but I really can't mention any other group of people trolling Perl discussions. It is the same for Ruby? It really seems strange for a language which got the name from Monthy Python. (-: Is it some inferiority feelings to environments which are fun ? :-)

Python is a dogmatic language. For the language, this is a good thing, helping it stay clean, simple and yet still powerful. But for the community, it breeds rabid fanboys, just like everything else that's dogmatic.

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#89

Post by steveklabnik »

junklight wrote: post #47

Python versus Ruby has always struck me as one of the absurd battles ever. The two languages seem to address a very similar space and have broadly similar features sets. Yes there are points of variation but both seem to work really well. People build cool and useful stuff in both. People are productive in both. As for me - I personally like the syntax of Python better. That could be because I learnt it first - or it…

I agree with you, the argument is pretty stupid.

The reason it gets so heated is that the two languages, while similar from some perspectives, are _wildly_ divergent in philosophy. It really is a Catholic/Protestant battle, as someone pointed out earlier.

Re: What Pythonistas Think of Ruby

#90

Post by jerf »

drmock wrote: post #73
mcav wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between "why aren't you using Python?" and "why aren't you following standard Python coding conventions?".

Ah, I see. So what you are tying to say is that the non-stop bashing of Perl, PHP and Ruby from Python developers should be interpreted as just a friendly "if [you don't like python], no worries." After all, one would have to be a "Rube (that's what [Ruby developers are] called, right?)" to think that Python developers aren't friendly to people who don't worship Python.

I just browsed over this entire thread, and you're by far the flamiest person here.

There are always bashers. Their existence proves nothing. The question is whether they represent the bulk of the community. It's hard to speak for an entire community, but it is certainly true that the Python community leaders are not into bashing other languages routinely.

Post reply on HN