| | |
Anyone want to learn Ruby
![]() |
Yes, I'll add a few words on RUBY. I saw it referenced a while ago along with hundreds of others. (So much creativity, so little time to learn.)
Recently, it was compared in Infoworld magazine against others for quick AJAX development frameworks and billed as Ruby on Rails. Since the competition was a hundred a seat all the way up to $50,000 to start while Ruby is Open Source, it was a simple choice.
I googled a fabulous tutorial by Chris Pine (as an author, he's smart and doesn't wear your eyes out). It is here: http://pine.fm/LearnToProgram/?Chapter=Contents
RUBY appears to have some incredibly strong structural advantages. It is clearly the product of someone with lots of other language experience. I hate language authors who use crazy new conventions like C++'s COUT and CIN. In Assembler, for example, all operands are right to left, except one and that one makes sense to be left to right. If you know Assembler, you know which one I mean. I thought I'd be settling in with Eiffel but after MS gave them the .NET imprimateur, they jacked their language to $5,000 a seat. Too rich for my blood!
A language needs predictability, which shortens the learning curve and increases the success to mistake ratio. Ruby accomplishes that with simple consistent structure and does it without all of the extra syntax parsing characters that many lazy compiler writers require.
AND did I mention it is Open Source?
If that isn't enough, it appears to be a pure OOL. I had to look up a lot of interesting terms (WIKIPEDIA RULES!) to develop a clear understanding of an OOL construct beyond the current C++ debacle. It was well worth it to find out why "Matz" chose single inheritance instead of multiple but allowed so much other power, e.g. blocks and procs can be passed through methods... WOWWWWW!!!
When I finished Chris's tutorial I had the same "Oh boy, here we go feeling." that I had in 1984 when I finished K&R's book on C. Now look where C is. Every Processor, every platform, most languages, most embedded code and most heavy duty apps. Yikes. Imagine the power of C if K&R had envisioned encapsulation. C++ would have never been born.
So how about it? Is Daniweb ready for Ruby?
Recently, it was compared in Infoworld magazine against others for quick AJAX development frameworks and billed as Ruby on Rails. Since the competition was a hundred a seat all the way up to $50,000 to start while Ruby is Open Source, it was a simple choice.
I googled a fabulous tutorial by Chris Pine (as an author, he's smart and doesn't wear your eyes out). It is here: http://pine.fm/LearnToProgram/?Chapter=Contents
RUBY appears to have some incredibly strong structural advantages. It is clearly the product of someone with lots of other language experience. I hate language authors who use crazy new conventions like C++'s COUT and CIN. In Assembler, for example, all operands are right to left, except one and that one makes sense to be left to right. If you know Assembler, you know which one I mean. I thought I'd be settling in with Eiffel but after MS gave them the .NET imprimateur, they jacked their language to $5,000 a seat. Too rich for my blood!
A language needs predictability, which shortens the learning curve and increases the success to mistake ratio. Ruby accomplishes that with simple consistent structure and does it without all of the extra syntax parsing characters that many lazy compiler writers require.
AND did I mention it is Open Source?
If that isn't enough, it appears to be a pure OOL. I had to look up a lot of interesting terms (WIKIPEDIA RULES!) to develop a clear understanding of an OOL construct beyond the current C++ debacle. It was well worth it to find out why "Matz" chose single inheritance instead of multiple but allowed so much other power, e.g. blocks and procs can be passed through methods... WOWWWWW!!!
When I finished Chris's tutorial I had the same "Oh boy, here we go feeling." that I had in 1984 when I finished K&R's book on C. Now look where C is. Every Processor, every platform, most languages, most embedded code and most heavy duty apps. Yikes. Imagine the power of C if K&R had envisioned encapsulation. C++ would have never been born.
So how about it? Is Daniweb ready for Ruby?
•
•
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 133
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 58
Hi!
Nor really
. Try this
Regards, mawe
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Dark_Omen
I know this is from awhile back, but you can use print in ruby and it does the same thing as puts.
. Try this Ruby Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
print "not" puts "the" p "same"
Regards, mawe
Along comes Boo, looks like Python and Ruby rolled into one, and you can compile it to an executable file, or use it in the shell.
http://boo.codehaus.org/
http://boo.codehaus.org/
May 'the Google' be with you!
>>i am ne wto ruby on rails,plzz
what in the world does that mean :eek: :eek: Looks like half English and half Gibberish.
what in the world does that mean :eek: :eek: Looks like half English and half Gibberish.
Last edited by Ancient Dragon; Jan 15th, 2007 at 6:18 am.
The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well.
-Pierre de Coubertin, The Olympic Creed Inspired by Bishop Ethelbert
-Pierre de Coubertin, The Olympic Creed Inspired by Bishop Ethelbert
Let's stop this right here guys, please.
Davey Winder
Information Security Journalist of the Year
www.happygeek.com
Follow me on Twitter: @happygeek
Information Security Journalist of the Year
www.happygeek.com
Follow me on Twitter: @happygeek
![]() |
Similar Threads
- need help with learning ruby (Ruby)
Other Threads in the Ruby Forum
- Previous Thread: Problems running Jruby with Glimmer
- Next Thread: Posting formdata onto webpage and into file
Views: 13217 | Replies: 21
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Tag cloud for Ruby






