[flagged]
Ruby's exceptional creatures
21–30 of 133 posts
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#22This is so ruby
Ruby is love, ruby is life.
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#23[flagged]
[flagged]
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#24This is so ruby
[dead]
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#25It's painful to see method_missing called out as a first class solution in the first creature https://www.exceptionalcreatures.com/bestiary/NoMethodError.... . "Practical Ruby" has three chapters dedicated to method_missing. "define_method" is more common these days and also painful to see. Ruby gets a lot of criticism for embracing magic and indirection ("Ruby, the bad parts of Perl"). It has some good parts (no fun…
One rule I try to go by, and I feel like this should be a pretty moderate take but isn't actually that commonly stated:
If we're talking about Rails at least, then meta-programming/magic/indirection, all that should be very rare in application code. It makes sense sometimes in more abstract libraries, where you have to handle flexible problems, but in application code it's really worthwhile to just be straightforward and verbose.
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#26Aside from being cute, and maybe harking back to why’s guide; I like how this feels like it aids in understanding. Each illustration provides character that helps aid in memorizing or creating a mental landscape of the exceptions.
Theres probably a lot of documentation that could be aided by illustrations like this along the lines of analogy and metaphor. Aside from making the process of reading documentation more fun, it probably helps differentiate long and complex documentation that otherwise might blur together.
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone with about 15 years of php under his belt, and now writing my second ruby app…i don’t know I’ll ever go back. It’s just so easy…
It’s easy indeed. Easy to make mistakes you don’t know were there until they bite you firmly in the arse. Again I’m not interested in how quickly you can create an app. I’m interested in your ability to maintain very complex business logic over the course of years. Working at a Ruby shop now, I can say with confidence I will never touch it again with however long of a pole I can find.
> I’m interested in your ability to maintain very complex business logic over the course of years.
I think this is a bit over the top. You can maintain complex business logic in any language (any language!) for decades with discipline and good software development processes.
Ruby lets you do a lot that could bite you, but it's people who write code.
Re: Ruby's exceptional creatures
#28It's painful to see method_missing called out as a first class solution in the first creature https://www.exceptionalcreatures.com/bestiary/NoMethodError.... . "Practical Ruby" has three chapters dedicated to method_missing. "define_method" is more common these days and also painful to see. Ruby gets a lot of criticism for embracing magic and indirection ("Ruby, the bad parts of Perl"). It has some good parts (no fun…
Respectfully mostly disagree. Ruby is full of sharp knives. Other languages have dull knives. Writing code without thinking will cut you either way. Things like method missing are exactly the right solution for a certain set of problems. If used thoughtfully, they’re amazing. If used thoughtlessly, bloody mess. But this is true in every language.
Where other languages have footguns, I've often described Ruby as offering footchainsaws, while tempting you to juggle them for fun. Far more damaging if you aim it at the wrong thing, but also far better at cutting down things that stand in your way.
I think it's the most enjoyable language I've used. With care and feeding it's amazing. I would absolutely not want to use it in a large company, that would be a walking nightmare.