Ruby 3.2.0 is from another dimension

Post by consp » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 1:14 PM UTC

laserlight wrote: post #88

samwillis wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think the Python syntax make its more explicit which is an in-place sort vs returning a sorted copy. And also what's a method call vs an attribute access. Someone new to Ruby will be WTF is the ! for?

Newcomers to Python will have many more WTFs, many of which are syntactically invisible.

Post by jbergens » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 1:19 PM UTC

samwillis wrote: post #25

michaelteter wrote: post #14

Ruby is my favorite language, and often it is a joy to use because of its combined attributes of brevity, expressive power, and feature consistency. It's disappointing that there are so many more jobs for another popular language - one that lacks the elegance and consistency but which has a larger ecosystem. As far as I know, the only well known reason for a company to choose Ruby is if they want Rails (and obviously…

You are obviously referring to Python and so I would like to note a few things. (I have nothing against Ruby) > Ruby ... its combined attributes of brevity, expressive power, and feature consistency. > [Python] lacks the elegance and consistency First I would argue Python is very consistent in its design, it aims to only have one obvious way to do things and so it's easy to guess how apis will work. It also aims for…

Post by Mikeb85 » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 1:22 PM UTC

wiseowise wrote: post #152

Mikeb85 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Python gained traction because of Google (Google used it initially then Guido worked for them for a decade+, vs. Matz at Heroku/salesforce) and then because it's the easiest way to use ML libs. That's it. It's slower than Ruby, has worse package management and less consistent syntax but if you want to use Tensorflow, PyTorch, etc..., it's the default.

> It's slower than Ruby That’s like saying that Dodge Neon is Slower than Mazda Miata. Both are bottom of the barrel compared to any compiled language.

Post by petre » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 1:27 PM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #115

michaelteter wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Ruby introduced filter_map: res = (1..10).select { |x| x != 5 }.map { |x| x ** 2 } With filter_map: res = (1..10).filter_map { |x| x ** 2 if x != 5 } In both cases, I think the Ruby solution is more readable. Python list comprehensions invert the subject (data) and the verb (action). You see what will be done before you see what the subject is. I would argue that showing the subject first allows easier code re…

The Python one looks fine to me, although I am a Pythonish person. It uses what people already know: the for something in somethings syntax of the for loop, and the if syntax. Also it's nice that this works in dictionaries, generators and lists. It also has the same narrative flow of Haskell's list comprehensions, which I think come from set theory: [x^2 | x As for your Ruby examples: I think you could argue that the…

   res = (1..10).reduce([]) { |a, x| x != 5 ? a.push(x**2) : a }

Post by ElCapitanMarkla » Wed, Jan 04, 2023, 1:28 PM UTC

schneems wrote: post #3

I added the syntax error detection in 3.2. I hope it’s helpful!