[jablan]

Although I am fascinated by _why's personality and his art, I think this book is partly to blame that Ruby is not as popular as it could (and should) have been. It somehow embodies that proto-hipster vibe the Ruby community used to have at the beginning, which alienated a lot of potential users. Luckily I managed to overcome that initial hurdle (the Pickaxe book helped a lot), but a lot of (good) developers I know haven't, and lots of them stayed with ASP (and its later offspring) and PHP.

[chaostheory]

I feel that Python is more to blame for that. When you have two similar languages but one of them takes away the paradox of choice, it’s gets evident why more people would choose Python in the end.

I don’t get the hate for Why the Lucky Stiff. Why does every programming book need to be K&R? Not everyone wants to read something as dry as a white paper all the time.

[michaelcampbell]

> I don’t get the hate for Why the Lucky Stiff.

It's not hate.

> Why does every programming book need to be K&R?

It doesn't. Nor do NONE of them need to be.

> Not everyone wants to read something as dry as a white paper all the time.

But some do, and _why's stuff isn't that.

You answered your own question. People like different things. Some didn't like _why's stuff; I'm one. I'm sure the guy is perfectly delightful, I just didn't enjoy nor get much from his writings.

[nailer]

Odd. I ended up in the Python world, but printed out a copy of Why's (Poignant) Guide to Ruby and read it because it reminded me that making stuff is fun.

[barnabee]

Holistically, even if this is true, I'd take the book and lower popularity for Ruby over no book