Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

[ Create a new account ]

ambs (3914)

ambs
reversethis-{tp. ... la} {ta} {eibla}
http://alfarrabio.di.uminho.pt/~albie

Journal of ambs (3914)

Thursday January 29, 2004

05:02 PM

Ruby...

[ #17093 ]

Speaking of Simon, when I invited him I was preparing a Perl session. The interesting, was his answer: should I talk about Perl or Ruby?

I know ruby already (well, I know it exists, and I did see some code examples) but I wasn't expecting this "change" from Simon.

When I compile Ruby, I love to have a autoconf/automake installation scheme (shame on Perl) but I hate not having tests (shame on Ruby).

I still didn't have time to learn Ruby, but can you guys, who read this, point where Ruby is better than Perl, and where Perl is better than Ruby?

List all Journal entries

Ruby... More | Login | Reply

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Where is Ruby better.... (Score:1)

by speters (1787)

I think there are two places where Ruby is better than Perl: OO and threads. Since Ruby was designed with both in mind, they are both much better implemented in Ruby than in Perl.
- Re:Where is Ruby better.... (Score:1)
  
  by ambs (3914)
  
  I love perl OO :-) I hate to have to compile Perl again to have threads :(
curious (Score:3, Insightful)

by jhi (318) <jhi@iki.fi> on 2004.01.30 2:08 (#27896) Homepage Journal

> When I compile Ruby, I love to have a autoconf/automake installation scheme (shame on Perl)

I'm always very curious of what people find to be so excellent in autoconf/automake (*). If you are referring to the Perl Configure by default being interactive (shame on GNU configure), I can't really see what GNU configure has that either Configure -des or configure.gnu don't have.

(*) Personally I find the GNU configure/build system to be an abomination.

Reply to This
- Re:curious (Score:1)
  
  by ambs (3914)
  
  In fact, I do not mind to have iteraction (ok, configure for Perl as too many iteraction :-)). It is true, also, that Perl Configure has many interesting lines :-)
  Although I do not think that GNU configure/build system is an abomination (of course it could be better, but I think they accept suggestions) I like to have a package, and know how to install it (to have a recipe). configure && make && make check && make install...
  Ok, you can say perl is similar (Configure && ma
Ruby vs Perl - the short version (Score:2)

by djberg96 (2603)

Where Perl is better:
=====================
Speed
Unicode support
Where Ruby is better:
=====================
OO and Exception handling
Extensions
Threads

Syntax is arguable (just talk to Python people!), but I prefer Ruby's.
- Re:Ruby vs Perl - the short version (Score:1)
  
  by ambs (3914)
  
  Only to say I like ugly syntaxes. I hate Python. Too much clean, and I can't manage to like forced indentation. I like to indent it, but when I have the time ;)