[30847] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 2092 Volume: 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Thu Jan 1 18:14:31 2009
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 15:14:23 -0800 (PST)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Thu, 1 Jan 2009 Volume: 11 Number: 2092
Today's topics:
Re: Why not Ruby? (Randal L. Schwartz)
Re: Why not Ruby? <placebo@dontbesilly.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <kentilton@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <sthalik@test123.ltd.pl>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rt8396@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rt8396@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rtomek@ceti.com.pl>
Re: Why not Ruby? <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid>
Re: Why not Ruby? <fuzzyman@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <tkpapp@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Re: Why not Ruby? <raw@RawMBP.local>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 02:07:26 -0800
From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <861vvnqqzl.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com>
>>>>> "r" == r <rt8396@gmail.com> writes:
r> Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
r> have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
r> ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
r> and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are
r> from my supposed "brothers" here at c.l.py. Just letting you know
r> there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world
r> that did not contain an Xah lee.
Since Usenet has neither "stars" nor "ratings", you are hallucinating.
Care to elaborate?
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 11:34:42 GMT
From: "Peter Wyzl" <placebo@dontbesilly.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <mT17l.6452$cu.6176@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
"Randal L. Schwartz" <merlyn@stonehenge.com> wrote in message
news:861vvnqqzl.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com...
>>>>>> "r" == r <rt8396@gmail.com> writes:
>
> r> Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
> r> have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
> r> ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
> r> and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are
> r> from my supposed "brothers" here at c.l.py. Just letting you know
> r> there are open minded people out here. I would hate to live in a world
> r> that did not contain an Xah lee.
>
> Since Usenet has neither "stars" nor "ratings", you are hallucinating.
>
> Care to elaborate?
Google groups' corrupting influence...
P
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:24:16 -0500
From: Kenneth Tilton <kentilton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <495cfcd2$0$4889$607ed4bc@cv.net>
sln@netherlands.com wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:16:41 -0500, Kenneth Tilton <kentilton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Xah Lee wrote:
>>> Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
>>> for those interested.
>>>
>>> * Why Not Ruby?
>>> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/why_not_Ruby.html
>>>
>>> plain text version follows:
>>> --------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Why Not Ruby?
>>>
>>> Xah Lee, 2008-12-31
>>>
>>> Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today.
>>>
>>> The articles i read in detail are:
>>>
>>> * Wikipedia: Ruby (programming language)¨J. Gives general overview.
>>>
>>> * Brief tutorial: "Ruby in Twenty Minutes"
>>> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/
>>>
>>> * Personal blog by Stevey Yegge, published in 2004-10.
>>> http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ruby-tour
>>>
>>> The Wikipedia gives the best intro and overview in proper context. The
>>> "Ruby in Twenty Minutes" is just 4 pages. It give you a very concrete
>>> intro to Ruby's syntax and semantics. Stevey Yegge's blog doesn't
>>> teach much and rambles, but provide a little personal view. I read it
>>> because his opinions i respect.
>>>
>>> Q: Will you learn Ruby?
>>>
>>> No. For practical application, the lang is some 100 times less useful
>>> than each of Perl, Python, PHP, Javascript. For academic study,
>>> functional langs like Mathematica, Haskell, OCaml, erlang, Qz, are far
>>> more interesting and powerful in almost all aspects. Further, there's
>>> also Perl6, NewLisp, Clojure, Scala... With respect to elegance or
>>> power, these modern lang of the past 5 years matches or exceed Ruby.
>>>
>>> Q: Do you think Ruby lang is elegant?
>>>
>>> Yes. In my opinion, better than Perl, Python, PHP. As a high level
>>> lang, it's far better than Java, C, C++ type of shit. However, i don't
>>> think it is any better than emacs lisp, Scheme lisp, javascript,
>>> Mathematica. Note that Ruby doesn't have a spec, and nor a formal
>>> spec. Javascript has. Ruby's syntax isn't that regular, nor is it
>>> based on a system. Mathemtica's is. Ruby's power is probably less than
>>> Scheme, and probably same as Javascript.
>>>
>>> I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword "end" to indicate
>>> code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Q: Won't Ruby be a interesting learning experience?
>>>
>>> No. As far as semantics goes, Ruby is basically identical to Perl,
>>> Python, PHP. I am a expert in Perl and PHP, and have working knowledge
>>> of Python. I already regretted having spent significant amount of time
>>> (roughly over a year) on Python. In retrospect, i didn't consider the
>>> time invested in Python worthwhile. (as it turns out, i don't like
>>> Python and Guido cult, as the lang is going the ways of OOP mumbo-
>>> jumbo with its Python 3 "brand new" future.) There is absolutely
>>> nothing new in Ruby, as compared to Perl, Python, PHP, or Emacs lisp,
>>> Scheme lisp.
>>>
>>> Q: Do you recommend new programers to learn Ruby then?
>>>
>>> Not particularly. As i mentioned, if you are interested in practical
>>> utility, there's already Perl, PHP, Python, Javascript, which are all
>>> heavily used in the computing industry. If you are interested as a
>>> academic exercise, there's Scheme lisp, and much of functional langs
>>> such as OCaml, Haskell, Mathematica, which will teach you a whole lot
>>> more about computer science, features of language semantics, etc.
>>>
>>> Q: Do you condemn Ruby?
>>>
>>> No. I think it's reasonably elegant, but today there are too many
>>> languages, so Ruby don't particularly standout for me. Many of them,
>>> are arguably quite more elegant and powerful than Ruby. See:
>>> Proliferation of Computing Languages.
>>>
>> Kenny Tilton, 2008-12-31
>>
>> Q: Why not Xah's review of Ruby?
>>
>>>> Spent about 3 hours looking into Ruby language today.
>> A. Three hours? I've had belches that lasted longer than that. Of
>> course, a true master can tell a lot in just a few hours of coding with
>> a new language...
>>
>>>> The articles i read in detail are:
>> Q: Read?!
>>
>> A: That's what he said.
>>
>>
>> hth,kzo
>
> Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's
> guts out in a second.
Sorry, my new President has banned drama so I will only be responding
pleasantly to civil comments. (This has been a non-responding response.)
Peace,k
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 17:34:51 +0000 (UTC)
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Stanis=C5=82aw?= Halik <sthalik@test123.ltd.pl>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <gjiurr$1gcn$4@opal.icpnet.pl>
In comp.lang.lisp r <rt8396@gmail.com> wrote:
> Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his
> insights of languages and tech is fascinating. The man lives in a
> world driven by common sense, and you know what they say --"Common
> sense is the least most common thing"-- just look around at the
> responses here.
Might hold true for some rants, but most of it's tl;dr drivel. For
instance, his critique of Lisp's homoiconicity is completely off-target.
> I come from a different world than IT, and I thought initially the IT
> world would be filled with intelligent, free thinking, and open minded
> people... BOY was i wrong! I would not turn my back on these people
> for a second, lest you catch a knife in it!
So-called "IT" is driven by capitalistic impulses. Dijkstra and his
followers get dismissed as ivory tower intellectuals.
FUT warning.
--
You only have power over people so long as you don’t take everything
away from them. But when you’ve robbed a man of everything he’s no longer
in your power — he’s free again. -- Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 09:50:57 -0800 (PST)
From: r <rt8396@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <39d1883d-fb26-41cd-8de3-9185760445f7@f13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 1, 2:05=A0am, Jason Rumney <jasonrum...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 1, 3:12=A0pm, r <rt8...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The man lives in a world driven by common sense
>
> "Common" sense suggests that his views are shared among the general
> populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never-
> ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to
> start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the
> debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are
> not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little
> more carefully sometimes.
I think if you will consider society as a whole, you will see that
most people don't display much sense at all. "Joe Blow" only cares
about paris hilton, britney spears, or janet jackson wardrobe
malfunctions. The only thing they contribute to society is human
excrement. So --"Common sense is the least most common thing"-- really
means there exists no sense as a commonality.
This can apply to higher educated people too, even Guido. Go and read
Xahs take on the Python official tutorial, you will find your self
agreeing with everything that he says. Guido filled it with so much
fluff and off topic BS, causing the learning process to shut down. The
only kind of person that might find it enjoying would be a fellow
Computer Science Graduate. I did not know it at the time but this
contributed to my late understanding of classes and regexes. And being
such a fanboy of Python and carrying such a high respect for Guido
that is hard for me to say, BUT it is the TRUTH nonetheless. Guido has
no business writing tutorials anymore, WHY you ask. Because he is too
smart, and too much on the inside. He cannot relate to the n00b
pythoneer, he has crossed the Rubicon. Less fluff more simple examples
are the key to quick learning. My love for python has blinded me to
some of the atrocities that exist here. I have many more examples from
the Official-TUT than Xah covered.
Don't take my word, judge for yourself...
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/xlali_skami_cukta.html
here is Xah's take on OOP, very good reading for beginners and
Gurus...
http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/t2/oop.html
If all Xah did was come here and say "Hey, python sucks donkey
dicks!", i would pay him no mind. But he brings much intelligence, and
vigor to an otherwise boring, and sometimes mindless newsgroup. What i
like about him is his out-side-the-box thinking style. He does not
give in to this BS "Proper Society" wants to push onto us. He is a
real rebel, but WITH a cause! And the cause is to bring common sense
back to a world of fluff an BS jargonisms. I don't always agree with
his thoughts, but most the time he's spot on. Open your min c.l.py.
Lest it close forever.
eliminate the life decline...
its time to change...
can't stay the same...
Revolution is my name!
-Phil Anselmo-
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 10:17:54 -0800
From: Jürgen Exner <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <te1ql4l5udg64nt5rkbtb5bavjnb9ihq3q@4ax.com>
r <rt8396@gmail.com> wrote:
[Why not Ruby?]
Becasue it is off topic in CL.perl.M just as in any other NG he posted
to.
>Face it, the world needs people like Xah. Go check out his site, his
Oh my good, the idiot discovered alter egos.
>There is nothing wrong with a person expressing their opinion on any
>subject. Apparently some of you need to get laid and calm down a
>little. Xah has just as much right as anyone here to post his
>thoughts, even if they are off topic.
Exactly everyone's point. He has exactly the same right as anybody else
which is exactly that NOBODY has the "right" to post off topic posts.
Sometimes they may be tolerated, on rare, special occasions even be
welcome. But by and large they are as disturbing as playing 'Love me
tender' during a perfomance of the Walkuere. I don't want to hear Elvis,
I paid my money for Wagner! If I wanted to listen to Elvis, then I would
go to an Elvis concert.
>Look, if you don't like what he
>is saying, DON'T F'IN READ IT!
He has been plonked a loooooooong time ago. It's just he newcomers, who
still respond to him. And no his alter ego with the unpronouncable name
of rt8396.
>Xah, I been watching your posts for sometime and it looks like you
>have been around for a while. Your profile shows one star & 410
>ratings. I have only been in usenet for 2 month and i have one star
>and 253 ratings(that will grow to much more after this post), most are
There are neither profiles nor stars or ratings on Usenet. Keep you
made-up nonsense to yourself.
jue
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:35:54 -0800 (PST)
From: r <rt8396@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <d39bee8a-4282-4c37-bbb6-f54ac3658426@r38g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
Xah Lee,
> I also didn't like the fact that ruby uses keyword "end" to indicate
> code block much as Pascal and Visual Basic, Logo, do. I don't like
> that.
You could not be more right Xah, the use of "end" in a language as
high level as Ruby is redundant, and idiotic. There are a few things
about Ruby i really like, but this "end" business is blasphemy. If
ruby did not use indentation, i would see the need for "end", or
braces, or whatever, but why use both indentation AND the "end" word?
Such stupidity. I guess Mats thought Ruby would look too much like
Python, ARE YOU KIDDING MATS?, you already took so much from Python
anyway, dropping the end statement won't change that. And heck, you
will gain many new users with out it's archaic redundancy!!!!
I must say at first i did not like the each method but it has grow on
me because of its space saving attributes. There are also some nice
shortcuts in Ruby that do not exist in Python. I am beginning to think
the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and
Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear
syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus. I would probably lean more
towards python scoping and classes than ruby, but python classes need
a little less redundancy also. Of course pythons list, dict, strings
in my opinion just can't be beat, and regex forget-a-about-it! Python
rules here. Even though Ruby has built in support, python's is much
more elegant. I really like pythons handling of modules and
module.class.method syntax.
Both languages have much to offer, i believe though Python has a
better base, it just needs some cleaning up, and shortcut syntax so
moderate/Gurus don't develop carpal tunnel too early :)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 20:08:34 +0100
From: Tomasz Rola <rtomek@ceti.com.pl>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0901011949490.14394@tau.ceti.pl>
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, sln@netherlands.com wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:16:41 -0500, Kenneth Tilton <kentilton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Xah Lee wrote:
> >> Just spent 3 hours looking into Ruby today. Here's my short impression
> >> for those interested.
> >>
>
> Be carefull what you say. If they pay me I would rip your and Xah's
> guts out in a second.
>
> sln
Too much champagne? A guy (XL) is sometimes off topic and I don't always
agree with his postings - if I find the subject somewhat worthy, I usually
skim through it, this is how I have found myself knee deep in this
strange exchange between XL's supporters and opponents. And his website is
big like a magazine and full of strange, sometimes not interesting or hard
to assess stuff (it needs time to read and time is hard to find nowadays).
But sometimes, what he writes is informative, too. A bit redundant but
still, I would give him a small "plus", rather than "zero" or "minus".
But I do not remember him being blunt or agressive.
Regards,
Tomasz Rola
--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
** **
** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola@bigfoot.com **
------------------------------
Date: 01 Jan 2009 12:32:53 -0800
From: Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <7xr63m3gy2.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
r <rt8396@gmail.com> writes:
> I am beginning to think
> the perfect high level language would take the best for Ruby and
> Python. The ultimate language with speed in mind, pythons clear
> syntax, but with shortcuts for gurus.
You might like Tim Sweeney's POPL talk:
http://www.st.cs.uni-saarland.de/edu/seminare/2005/advanced-fp/docs/sweeny.pdf
> Of course pythons list, dict, strings in my opinion just can't be beat,
On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary
implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. One of these years
I'll get around to writing one.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 13:13:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Fuzzyman <fuzzyman@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <9c813a5c-919c-4407-b78c-fec33d1bd0fa@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 1, 8:32=A0pm, Paul Rubin <http://phr...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
[snip...]
> > Of course pythons list, dict, strings in my opinion just can't be beat,
>
> On many occasions I've wished for a functional dictionary
> implementation in Python, like Haskell's Data.Map. =A0One of these years
> I'll get around to writing one.
Care to save me the effort of looking it up and tell me what Data.Map
does that Python's dict doesn't?
I guess if it is functional then every mutation must copy and return a
new data structure? (Which will be much more efficient in Haskell than
in Python - Haskell can share most of the underlying data whereas
Python would have to create a new dict every time. At least it only
stores references.)
Michael Foord
--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100
From: Richard Riley <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <gjjg1s$kuf$1@rileyrgdev.motzarella.org>
Jason Rumney <jasonrumney@gmail.com> writes:
> On Jan 1, 3:12Â pm, r <rt8...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The man lives in a world driven by common sense
>
> "Common" sense suggests that his views are shared among the general
> populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never-
> ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to
> start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the
> debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are
> not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little
> more carefully sometimes.
I find that with Xah's posts people argue the man and not his
points. And they argue the man because he refuses to be brow beaten by
those who do not like to be criticised or are too think skinned. I
rarely find his posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp
tutorial is far and away better than anything else out there for the
programmer moving to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and
supportive evidence and rarely with "because I'm experienced and thats
the way it is" - something not every one takes the time to do. He is
clearly intelligent, thoughtful and experienced if a little lacking in
finesse at times. The world needs more Xah lees.
--
important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:29:31 +0100
From: Richard Riley <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <gjjg4e$kuf$2@rileyrgdev.motzarella.org>
r <rt8396@gmail.com> writes:
> On Jan 1, 2:05Â am, Jason Rumney <jasonrum...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 1, 3:12Â pm, r <rt8...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > The man lives in a world driven by common sense
>>
>> "Common" sense suggests that his views are shared among the general
>> populace. I don't see much evidence of that in the sometimes never-
>> ending threads that frequently follow his postings. But it is good to
>> start debates about making changes to the status quo, often the
>> debates will result in worthwhile changes, even if those changes are
>> not what he proposed. I just wish he would choose his venue a little
>> more carefully sometimes.
>
> I think if you will consider society as a whole, you will see that
> most people don't display much sense at all. "Joe Blow" only cares
> about paris hilton, britney spears, or janet jackson wardrobe
> malfunctions. The only thing they contribute to society is human
> excrement. So --"Common sense is the least most common thing"-- really
> means there exists no sense as a commonality.
>
> This can apply to higher educated people too, even Guido. Go and read
> Xahs take on the Python official tutorial, you will find your self
> agreeing with everything that he says. Guido filled it with so much
> fluff and off topic BS, causing the learning process to shut down. The
> only kind of person that might find it enjoying would be a fellow
> Computer Science Graduate. I did not know it at the time but this
> contributed to my late understanding of classes and regexes. And being
> such a fanboy of Python and carrying such a high respect for Guido
> that is hard for me to say, BUT it is the TRUTH nonetheless. Guido has
> no business writing tutorials anymore, WHY you ask. Because he is too
> smart, and too much on the inside. He cannot relate to the n00b
> pythoneer, he has crossed the Rubicon. Less fluff more simple examples
> are the key to quick learning. My love for python has blinded me to
> some of the atrocities that exist here. I have many more examples from
> the Official-TUT than Xah covered.
>
> Don't take my word, judge for yourself...
> http://xahlee.org/perl-python/xlali_skami_cukta.html
>
> here is Xah's take on OOP, very good reading for beginners and
> Gurus...
> http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/t2/oop.html
>
> If all Xah did was come here and say "Hey, python sucks donkey
> dicks!", i would pay him no mind. But he brings much intelligence, and
> vigor to an otherwise boring, and sometimes mindless newsgroup. What i
> like about him is his out-side-the-box thinking style. He does not
> give in to this BS "Proper Society" wants to push onto us. He is a
> real rebel, but WITH a cause! And the cause is to bring common sense
> back to a world of fluff an BS jargonisms. I don't always agree with
> his thoughts, but most the time he's spot on. Open your min c.l.py.
> Lest it close forever.
Great post and I agree with you 100%.
--
important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:34:43 +0100
From: Richard Riley <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <gjjge7$kuf$3@rileyrgdev.motzarella.org>
Tim Greer <tim@burlyhost.com> writes:
> Giampaolo Rodola' wrote:
>
>> This is not a Ruby group.
>> I recommend you to go waste your time there.
>
> That poster has a frequent habit of cross posting to multiple,
> irrelevant news groups. There's no rhyme or reason to it. It's best
> to just filter the guy's posts.
No rhyme nor reason? It's quite clear, to me, why.
How is a comparison article not relevant when he is trying to stimulate
discussion about alternative languages for modern development? Most news
readers feature a kill thread command if you are not interested in the
content. Certainly less extreme or ignorant than killing all posts from
someone who clearly has interesting things to say about development
practises and tools.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Jan 2009 22:36:28 GMT
From: Tamas K Papp <tkpapp@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <6s4urcF47nr3U2@mid.individual.net>
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote:
> posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far
> and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving
> to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive
Programmers don't "move" to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity
when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use
it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for
those who like Lisp).
Tamas
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:38:43 +0100
From: Richard Riley <rileyrgdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <gjjgll$kuf$4@rileyrgdev.motzarella.org>
Tamas K Papp <tkpapp@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote:
>
>> posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far
>> and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving
>> to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive
>
> Programmers don't "move" to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity
> when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use
> it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for
> those who like Lisp).
>
> Tamas
"move to Elisp" was clearly meant as "moving towards it in order to use
it". In this case to modify emacs. And to suggest that jobs of work are
not done in Emacs is ridiculous. I am at a loss to really understand
what you mean here in the context.
--
important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday. ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations: Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:51:30 +0100
From: Raymond Wiker <raw@RawMBP.local>
Subject: Re: Why not Ruby?
Message-Id: <m28wpu1vyl.fsf@RAWMBP.local>
Richard Riley <rileyrgdev@gmail.com> writes:
> Tamas K Papp <tkpapp@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote:
>>
>>> posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far
>>> and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving
>>> to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive
>>
>> Programmers don't "move" to Elisp. Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity
>> when you want to program Emacs. No one in his/her right mind would use
>> it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for
>> those who like Lisp).
>>
>> Tamas
>
> "move to Elisp" was clearly meant as "moving towards it in order to use
> it". In this case to modify emacs. And to suggest that jobs of work are
> not done in Emacs is ridiculous. I am at a loss to really understand
> what you mean here in the context.
OK, how about this: Xah's elisp code stinks to high
heaven. His code should not be studied by anybody who actually wants
to actually learn elisp (or anything else).
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V11 Issue 2092
***************************************
