Re: Why I chose Python over Ruby
Xavier Morel wrote: > >> 2) Ruby does not have true first-class functions living in the same >> namespace as other variables while Python does : >> >> In Ruby you need extra syntax that ruins the "first-class-ness" : >> > The extra syntax is a side-effect of the parensless call of method, it > doesn't mean that methods are not first-class objects. The parensless calls also allow one to write beautiful DSLs with Ruby. -- Bil http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why I chose Python over Ruby
Marcin Mielżyński wrote: > Roy Smith wrote: > >> What's a DSL? > > Domain Specific Language. It is easy to tweak Rubys syntax and semantics > into something that looks like another language designed for a specific > task. For example, see Margin Fowler's articles: http://martinfowler.com/bliki/DomainSpecificLanguage.html http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/rake.html Regards, -- Bil http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python advocacy in scientific computation
Magnus Lycka wrote: > Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > >> I did look at Ruby once... It looked to me like the worst aspects of >> PERL grafted onto the worst parts of old Python. > > Don't forget that there are portions of Smalltalk syntax > (blocks) added in as well. I guess it could be seen as Perl-NG. Actually, the Perl part was one of the last steps in the Ruby recipe according to Matz: Ruby is a language designed in the following steps: * take a simple lisp language (like one prior to CL). * remove macros, s-expression. * add simple object system (much simpler than CLOS). * add blocks, inspired by higher order functions. * add methods found in Smalltalk. * add functionality found in Perl (in OO way). So, Ruby was a Lisp originally, in theory. Let's call it MatzLisp from now on. ;-) --from http://ruby-talk.org/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/179642 Regards, -- Bil http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
