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

RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

rubyjs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 38 posts

Re: RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

#3

Post by orensol »

I'm not a rubyist, and I can see how this can be nice for ruby developers, but IMHO, if you need javascript - use javascript.

Why add another layer of complexity and error proneness? What happens when a different js programmer needs to review your code? Or when you need to write some Node.js code and forgot all about syntax?

"The main motive is to have a decent standard library for JavaScript" - jQuery works just fine.

Re: RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

#5

Post by laurent123456 »

orensol wrote: post #3

I'm not a rubyist, and I can see how this can be nice for ruby developers, but IMHO, if you need javascript - use javascript. Why add another layer of complexity and error proneness? What happens when a different js programmer needs to review your code? Or when you need to write some Node.js code and forgot all about syntax? "The main motive is to have a decent standard library for JavaScript" - jQuery works just fin…

Actually, even without jQuery, the native library for strings, arrays and numbers is usually more than enough. I might have needed something like `capitalize()` once or twice but would probably not include a whole library just for that.

Re: RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

#6

Post by sharkbrainguy »

orensol wrote: post #3

I'm not a rubyist, and I can see how this can be nice for ruby developers, but IMHO, if you need javascript - use javascript. Why add another layer of complexity and error proneness? What happens when a different js programmer needs to review your code? Or when you need to write some Node.js code and forgot all about syntax? "The main motive is to have a decent standard library for JavaScript" - jQuery works just fin…

Clearly jQuery isn't providing a lot of the things they are looking for in a standard library, as it is focussed on DOM manipulation and Ruby.js attempts to provide core types like Enumerables and Time.

Re: RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

#7

Post by rtpg »

orensol wrote: post #3

I'm not a rubyist, and I can see how this can be nice for ruby developers, but IMHO, if you need javascript - use javascript. Why add another layer of complexity and error proneness? What happens when a different js programmer needs to review your code? Or when you need to write some Node.js code and forgot all about syntax? "The main motive is to have a decent standard library for JavaScript" - jQuery works just fin…

I've never considered jQuery as a standard library, more of an interface for the DOM, especially considering that 99% of it is at most 2 steps away from the DOM.

Re: RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

#8

Post by bstar77 »

orensol wrote: post #3

I'm not a rubyist, and I can see how this can be nice for ruby developers, but IMHO, if you need javascript - use javascript. Why add another layer of complexity and error proneness? What happens when a different js programmer needs to review your code? Or when you need to write some Node.js code and forgot all about syntax? "The main motive is to have a decent standard library for JavaScript" - jQuery works just fin…

This is js, just extended with some extra functionality. No different than jquery, underscore, etc. I don't see any reason for the harsh criticism, remember js is a very dynamic language that's in constant flux... We're not coding in C here.

Re: RubyJS: A JavaScript standard library based on the Ruby core-lib

#9

Post by bstar77 »

pzaich wrote: post #2

How are callbacks handled in this library? I prefer js anonymous functions to Procs & lambdas in Ruby.

I do as we'll. After working in node for a bit I have come to appreciate how nice the call backs work, but I hate the fact I have to use them every where. Plus ruby has a few ways to implement callbacks which can be confusing.
Post reply on HN