[bee_rider]

> Ruby attracts a particular kind of person. Not better. Not smarter. Just… different. People who care how code feels to write and read. People who see programming as a craft that can be expressive. People who understand that most of our careers are spent living inside someone else’s decisions, so joy isn’t a luxury… it’s the only way this work stays humane.

The idea that caring about how your programs feel to write or read is somehow “different” seems weird to me. I don’t write Ruby so maybe I just don’t appreciate this difference.

But I mean, I write fun-to-write, silly little experiments in Octave, Fortran, and Python… I don’t know if anyone would enjoy reading them, but I don’t really see how a language could prevent you from finding joy in programming (other than Java of course /s).

[cuddlyogre]

>I don’t really see how a language could prevent you from finding joy in programming

By saddling the writer with tons of syntax and gotchas that is hard to keep at the top of his mind when trying to create.

Languages like c++ and java might be powerful, but there are so many hurdles that are between start and end that unless you are proficient in the language or have a desire to learn the language, it's very tempting to just give up.

Languages like ruby and python are not fast, but their syntax is so straight forward, the effort to go from a to z is a fraction of other languages, leading to the developer to be able to deliver faster.

From the point of view of a developer that loves to learn, simpler languages inspire me to learn more complex languages, which in turn gives me more opportunity to enjoy my chosen craft.

[tovej]

C++ is not that complex, and honestly it's one of the best documented languages out there. The semantics are very clear and you can easily decide to stick to a smaller subset of C++ if you don't like the advanced features like concepts, template metaprogramming, and class hierarchies (I would in general advice against OOP in C++, just as I would in any other language).

Ruby does a lot of magic stuff to help beginners. That means the semantics are unclear. IMO this is similar to how Apple optimizes UI/UX for first impressions to drive sales. The journeyman user is neglected, simple things are easy to do, but the most powerful features are missing for journeyman and advanced users.

I'm not saying Ruby is a bad language. Just saying that I have the opposite view. I too love to learn, but Ruby did not help me learn, it actively got in my way.

You can make a simple language without confusing semantics, see Go, C, python.

[ModernMech]

> C++ is not that complex

C++ is so complex that you can take 10 C++ devs, put them in the same room, and none of them will be able to read any others' code because they've each written it in a mutually exclusive C++ feature set.

[tovej]

Have you written C++? There are no "mutually exclusive" feature sets. The only deprecated language features I can think of are auto pointers and trigraphs, and I have never seen them in the wild.

[ModernMech]

I was making a hyperbolic joke. But "mutually exclusive feature sets" means two feature sets without overlapping features.

[tovej]

It doesn't really work as a joke if there's no truth to it.

I understand what mutually exclusive means. There are no two people writing C++ with no overlapping language features. I struggle to understand what you might even mean.

Non-equal subsets of the full language feature set? Yes, that will happen with any nontrivial language.

[cuddlyogre]

>C++ is not that complex

Relative to what, exactly?

It is very hard to take a statement like yours seriously when even veteran developers continue to ship software with memory bugs that exfiltrate data and crash systems to this day.

[tovej]

When I said it's not complex I did not mean it's perfect or that it is easy to write flawless code in C++. And obviously C++ is most relevant within its own niche: video games, scientific computing, and performance critical software. The issues you mentioned are tradeoffs that C++ suffers from the higher degree of control a developer has. They're real, and that's a valid point.

What I meant was that if you wish to fully understand how the language works, I bet you that C++ has a clearer path to get there than Ruby does. The documentation and surrounding ecosystem of conference talks, content creators, and longer texts on new features is excellent. Not to mention public online communities like the irc channels on libera.chat.

The original poster I answered to was saying that C++ requires a lot of dedication to understand, but I would say this is true of every language, and C++ is very good at getting you there.

[smileson2]

> Relative to what, exactly?

Life

[phantasmish]

I love Ruby (… contextually, with the most important part of that context being “for small programs”) and its general culture (_why is/was amazing) but hate Rails.

In practice this means I don’t use Ruby professionally any more, because there aren’t a lot of non-Rails Ruby jobs. And since I write a lot of python at work, that’s my go-to for my own quick little personal scripts, too, just for simplicity’s sake as far as what I have to keep in “working memory”, if you will. Plus it’s already installed on most systems I touch, unlike Ruby.

Like I do care about how “joyful” a language is but I also care about how hard it is to work with if a codebase has been through a bunch of contractors’ and agencies’ hands and it’s kind of a mess and the test suite hasn’t been updated during two full years of active development. For my own “joy”’s sake, give me Go or c# or maybe even Java if you must, under those circumstances. It’s unlikely I’ll find much joy in Ruby when that’s happened, which is often.