Ruby

So why is your opinion so general? Do you consider literally every feature of Ruby to be designed as wrongly as possible, so that no similarity at all is acceptable when making a new language? Even if that's the case, you could still use Ruby as an example of what not to do, and then that counts as "inspiration." Mind you, the result would be pretty crazy. I'd expect the feature list to include "instructions are always executed last to first" and "the syntax has no matching bracket pairs" and the like.

Or maybe you know Ruby only by reputation, and you consider it some kind of poisonous meme whose unbridled ravages can turn a normal human brain into a mnemorrheic shitstorm whose major symptoms include uncanny obsessions with Red Bull and electric guitars. Many hapless code cowboys once dear to you were lost overnight after only the briefest perusal of a book bound in human skin and adorned with an unholy pickaxe, and to this day you dare not utter the R word in more than a whisper for fear you'll invoke the dark lords of the forge and have the skin flayed from your bones.

I really hope it's the latter.

xD Rockstar

Sucking on Dicks

I lik ruby

SLOW AS FUCK

It's a SHITTY SHITTY LANGUAGE. PERIOD.

sage this fucker choo choo!

Saging for OP not learning ``D''

That ceiling when your rapist you will never have a tiny animu girl to summon dark lords with and get the skin flayed from you robes :,(

--
Sent from my iPhone

I didn't actually read the OP, so bear with me.

I started using Ruby in 2003, before the hipsters on rails bandwagon. I stopped using it somewhere around 2005 or 2006. The BLOGOSPHERE started filling up with interesting Ruby articles, and while reading them, I realized that Ruby's syntactic shit has led to every Ruby programmer in the world to come up with his own language. Around the same time, I had determined that Ruby was slow as fuck, even for its silly `scripting language' category (I hear this has somewhat changed since then).

Python quickly filled the ecological niche Ruby had been inhabiting in my programming ecosystem. Nowadays, I use Common Lisp even for those things.

>>9
What kind of things do you write in Lisp when you're not wasting time in the esteemed Czech metropolis of old? Please post an example. I'd like to see how it compares to the shell scripts I have to write on occasion.

Greenspun's 10th santorum: Any sufficiently long thread about another programming language will transform into a poorly written, half-complete anime version of a Common Lisp thread.

>>10
I'm on a wrong machine, but in short: barring party tricks, for trivial tasks, they are always somewhat longer than shell scripts (not too much, with libraries such as osicat), but I use CL for everything else (expect for the thing I use C for), so I don't need to recall some crappy syntax and leave the programmatic utopia of SLIME everytime I need a shell script.

I haven't realized what people meant by the depth of stupidity of ``rubyists'' until I saw the comments sections of some blogs that gave a fair critique the language.

>>12
I'm not gonna come right out and say that the community is ``Terrible!'' but it's truly a mixed blessing. On the one hand, the RAD obsession means that you can implement an interesting idea overnight... and more importantly, if someone else doesn't like how you did it, they can make a better version the next day. On the other hand, this means that assholes and total morons can (and do) contribute just as much as people who actually have "professionalism" in their vocabulary. Rails is a fine example of both of these.

You could make a Lisp dialect that does RAD as well as Ruby, but then you'd just have the same morons/assholes from Rubyland using a different language, so this is a really bad idea. Besides, I think the Haskell guys figured out a better way: Use a language with a high barrier of entry and cultivate a respect for abstract thought and academia, but build RAD infrastructure and promote that as the core virtue of your language/community. You get all the benefits of Ruby and none of the riffraff.

This is a bad post.

>>13
Haskell fanboys are just as bad as fair folk of Rubyland.
All the comments everywhere are full of CS freshmen saying how mathematically beautiful Haskell is and asking how to convert their shitty (already unreadable) code to point-free.
When the more intelligent folk is around, they start to discuss 15 different ways of polymorphism Haskell has that have no other uses than writing obfuscated as fuck implementations of fibs.

>>14
Look at it this way. What community doesn't have jerks in it? For that matter, how many otherwise decent people won't act like jerks if they've had a bad enough day? You can apply expertise and take steps to promote your signal to noise ratio going forward, but you can't eliminate the noise altogether.

I take a pragmatic view of this issue. Since you're gonna have jerks no matter what, it's better for them to be harmless idiots talking about harmless nonsense than productive people who you have to deal with on a daily basis because they built the whole platform you're working with. Rubyists constantly get away with being douchebags in an otherwise productive environment. The goal (my goal, not yours) is simply to discourage people from being douchebags while they're productive. Then they can go home and masturbate into the garbage disposal for all I care.

>>15
OK, I get your point.

But if one more kid asks me if monads are too hard for me to understand, I'll punch a hole in monitor.
Doesn't apply to this thread.