| I watched the whole thing. Quite entertaining, but the last 6 minutes is what matters. The strengths he mentions are: - tools and culture that's optimized for programmer happiness and productivity. - Promoting obviousness via the path of least surprise. - Consistency through well-considered conventions. - Carefully-designed value-based test suites. - Building long-term maintainable apps I have to ask because I am being exposed to Ruby at work right now and I find it, to be quite honest, a terrible language. I'm not trying to start a flame war, I am writing this cause I want to be open minded and have some hard-core rubyists point me in the direction of where I can learn what is good about this language. Specifically: 1) What tools / culture are optimized for programmer happiness & productivity in ruby?
- I don't find anything special about ruby at all. Let me know what improves happiness / productivity. I would like to dl whatever tools / ide / plugins / gems or whatever and take a look into it. 2) Does ruby truly promote the path of least surprise? I am often surprised when looking at ruby code because I find traceability difficult in Ruby. Where does the function come from when looking at a ruby codebase? Is it from a gem? Is it from some parent class that this class has extended? I have no idea. How do people make Ruby 'less surprising'? 3) I have no idea what is consistent well considered conventions. How do I know something is a well-considered convention? Just use a rubocop linter? 4) Carefully-designed value-based test suites: Please explain this. What makes testing in Ruby so much better than in other languages? 5) Building long-term maintainable apps: What makes Ruby apps more maintainable? |
1. It's a general attitude toward building interfaces; the reader of the code is put first. Yeah underneath things may be messy, but using those things should be nice. The onus is placed on the implementor, rather than the user. Ruby libraries will go to fairly extreme lengths to make things nice to use.
2. Matz has always said that he meant the path of least surprise to him, not to every programmer. I personally find this point the weakest.
3. Yes, stuff like rubocop can help teach you this, but you really pick it up from reading and writing others' code.
4. Ruby has had a test-focused bent for a long time; and so it has a lot of tools for testing. Back when I taught Ruby professionally, I even had an organization with a Perl webapp want me to teach their testers Ruby, to write test suites for the app in Ruby rather than Perl. Perl also has great testing, so I'm not sure I agreed with them in this case, but it is something many people feel.
5. I've seen many unmaintainable Ruby apps as well; I think this is something that should be aspired to overall, not necessarily something that's true today. Or rather, there's a period of development where people get enthused with a language, write tons of unmantainable code, step back, figure out why, and then the next iteration is better. Justin points out that node, being earlier in its life, might be in step 2, and that Ruby, being more mature, is on step 4 or 5 here.