[GLLUG] Best Web/Desktop Programming solution (...)

[Asenchi]

On 4/19/05, Sean O'Malley <picasso at madflower.com> wrote:
> Ruby is still in it's infancy, and you are talking about sending
> a "N00b" programmer who wants RAD development apps (and I can only
> assume a large codebase to borrow from.) to use Ruby. Which in
> some respects the OO might be easier, but digging out documentation and
> finding pre-written stuff to "borrow" from is another issue especially
> when you hit a wall.

Ruby is 13 years old, hardly infancy.  It is also the most popular,
most used programming language in Japan.

Ruby is unique in that you probably don't need a large code base to
borrow from.  But if you did, #ruby-lang on irc.freenode.net will whip
up a solution in about 10 minutes.  Or the mailinglists.  You can't
purchase support like that.

Java has thousands of  books published about it, how is that easier to
wade thru than to purchase the 1 Ruby book that covers every aspect of
the language.  Not to mention the numerous websites with documentation
on it.
 
> Now personally, I put RAD development into the "drag n' drop" catagory
> especially when the aforementioned person, already said they were using
> DreamWeaver which is one of the better Web RAD environments. I _assume_
> (and quite possibly incorrectly) an an upgrade from Frontpage and they
> grew up on VB and most of the apps are written in VB. I also assume, he
> went out on a limb and is trying to upgrade their IT infrastructure and
> talked his boss into this so it HAS to work.

No comment.  I have incredibly strong feelings against using
proprietary solutions when so many FREE solutions are available.  More
options.

> Ruby still doesn't do compile down to bytecode (next version
> supposedly), like Java or PHP(with Zend) so I am not sure how it is
> getting all this speed or all the great memory efficiency. It took Java
> about 5 years before people had tweaked the crap out of the interpreter to
> get the speed out of it. Maybe Ruby borrowed some of that knowledge, I
> don't know.

Why does a language need to compile down to bytecode?  Most of the PHP
sites out there don't run compiled language.

It has been designed from the ground up with all of the things that
lack in Java, PHP and Perl.  Taking the other things from other
languages.  Matz (creator) is a smart well versed guy in many many
languages.

> I think Ruby is a language worth learning, but if I was betting
> my business. I would jump onboard with Java for this particular
> application with the given the parameters.

This one will never convince me.  Not that you are trying to, I know. 
But I can't see how just because everyone else uses it you should.  I
recommend reading some of Paul Graham's essays on this subject.  He
has first hand experience.  As do I for that matter.

This argument is often used against all Open Source solutions.

> The business argument goes kind of like this:
> 1 Can we get support for this?
If you write something, you pretty much are able to support it.  Or should be.
> 2. If you leave is there anyone we can hire?
Programmers have to learn new things.  And it isn't hard to learn a
new language once you've learned one.
> 3. How stable and reliable has it been over the past 5-7 years?
How can this be an argument if you are developing something new?  It
is an argument for, "should we re-write this".
> 4. Will it do what we want?
Easy, most languages have the ability.
> 5. Is it scalable and tested?
Try it for yourself.
 
> then skip WAY down on the list and you will see:
> 1492. How popular will this technology be tommorrow?
AS/400's are still in use.  I am using p100's as firewalls.  Is this
really on the list of questions?

> And maybe in about 4 years, Ruby will be a more robust language and worth
> looking in to. In the meantime, you have a business to run that has to
> make it another 4 years or you need to keep your job. =)

I love this discussion, hopefully I haven't offended anyone yet.  I
hope it has stayed in context.  Thank you.
-- 
<<< Asenchi the White >>>