It's the never ending "end"s that bother me about Ruby. class Mess def chaos(x) if x > 0 [1,2,3].each do |i| case i when 1 if i.odd? puts "odd" else puts "even" end when 2 begin puts "trying" rescue puts "failed" end else puts "other" end end else puts "negative" end end end Clear away all those ends and the program logic pops out. Much fresher! class Mess: def chaos(self, x): if x > 0: for i in [1, 2, 3]: match i: c…
I'd love Python if it weren't for whitespace. I wanna cut/paste code into a REPL, and Python makes that difficult.
What looks like stagnation to Steen is actually [1] Matz’s remarkable foresight that provided stability and developer happiness. Steen’s not wrong that Python evolved and Ruby moved slower, but he’s wrong to call Ruby stagnant or irrelevant. Just think what we've enjoyed in recent times: YJIT and MJIT massively improved runtime performance, ractors, the various type system efforts (RBS/Sorbet etc) that give gradual t…
My reaction to that part of the post was, “Well, it seems like Python needed to evolve while Ruby was better-designed from the beginning. That’s a failing of Python, not of Ruby.” Language stability is a good thing, which is why I prefer Clojure myself. I know enough Python and Ruby to be dangerous. I’m certainly no expert in either one. That said, Python always struck me as a bit of a hack, but people seemed to resonate with the “indentation is significant” syntax, whereas Ruby felt like it was better designed, taking “everything is an object” to its natural conclusion, similar to Smalltalk, but suffering from performance issues because that means lots of more heavyweight message dispatch.
Back when autocompletion and stuff were only available in Visual Studio/Xcode/Other bug IDEs, I was forced to use Ruby and fell in love with it. It didn't matter what I used as my editor was Sublime. But when VSCode came and language features became democratized, I never touched a type-less language again. Why should someone opt for a language with absolutely no features where one can have autocompletion, typecheckin…
This was always true, to be honest. Statically typed languages have always been better. Free IDEs such as Eclipse have been available for a long time. Good JVM languages such as Scala have been available for a long time. If only the Ruby ecosystem had adopted Scala instead of Ruby, with cutesy books and eccentric underscored personalities, history might have been different.
Back when autocompletion and stuff were only available in Visual Studio/Xcode/Other bug IDEs, I was forced to use Ruby and fell in love with it. It didn't matter what I used as my editor was Sublime. But when VSCode came and language features became democratized, I never touched a type-less language again. Why should someone opt for a language with absolutely no features where one can have autocompletion, typecheckin…
Static type-signatures are inevitable in general. You can see this by how even the Ruby documentation has to make up silly ad hoc notation like "→ array_of_strings", "→ matchdata or nil" etc.
Too much change isn't good though. There's value in consistent basics. I've seen people doing things like: #define BEGIN { #define END } because they liked Pascal, and that way lies madness.
> that way lies madness. Flashbacks to scala operator PTSD. No. I don't want to use ++ ^^%% operator! I am not a number! I'm a man!
LSP (Language Server Protocol) was the final nail in the coffin of Emacs for me. VSCode was "good enough" for pretty much every language with LSP at that point, I did't even bother with Jetbrains ides outside of work after that. And when Obsidian replaced org-mode for me, I deleted my .emacs directory from my dotfiles repository.
> LSP (Language Server Protocol) was the final nail in the coffin of Emacs for me. It was the opposite for me. Emacs + LSP + many other common conveniences all bind together so beautifully and efficiently that I can't imagine using any other IDE at this point.
Same, Emacs is improving at a rapid rate thanks to its adoption of LSP and Tree-Sitter. Performance is very good, but the async story needs to become better.
Back when autocompletion and stuff were only available in Visual Studio/Xcode/Other bug IDEs, I was forced to use Ruby and fell in love with it. It didn't matter what I used as my editor was Sublime. But when VSCode came and language features became democratized, I never touched a type-less language again. Why should someone opt for a language with absolutely no features where one can have autocompletion, typecheckin…
Fully agree. Had to work in the past with ruby. Loved it but type errors during runtime where a thing and therefore I would never use ruby in production again. I use kotlin nowadays…
I used Kotlin before it was popular and people laughed at me... And now I use TypeScript...
> Python is not my favorite programming language. In fact, allow me to drop the euphemism and express my pure, unadulterated thoughts about it: I never liked Python, I see it as a huge red flag and I think the world would be a better place if we all decided to finally move on from it.
Why do people make hating a tool their entire personality? I have noticed this same thing with languages like Go ("oh no Go still bad") and C++. I don't like C++ myself but I don't hate it. It would be like hating a screwdriver.
If you don't like a language simply don't use it, there are hundreds of alternatives. If your employer is making you write in that language you should hate your employer, not the language.