I really feel like we need to slow our roll on shit-talking Ruby on Rails. Very few of us are ever going to have to worry about scale on a level where Ruby‘s raw performance metrics are going to be that impactful. Plus, let us not forget one of the main tenets of Ruby: programmer happiness.
I did not go to school for CS, so I don’t have the acquired taste for FP that a lot of folks have, I guess. I’m a digital carpenter; I want the code to be clear, easy to understand and flexible. Ruby is one of the best for that.
If you really think that you’re going to be managing 1M connections on one node a la Elixir (WhatsApp), go for it. That said, let’s keep the click-baity holier-than-thou hot takes to a minimum.
You can write unintelligible nonsense in any language, my dude. Ruby's focus is "developer happiness", and I feel that it delivers. If you prefer to make yourself miserable, Java will welcome you with open arms.
IDK man. I am in like 7th company in my life, ranging from 10k employees to the current startup of 100, and in all of them, the apps deal with thousands of parallel connections. And it is big difference if your hourly batch takes 15 minutes on JVM or 3 hours on Ruby, because then you need to write your app as parallel right away (something not easy to do in Ruby) and them run it on 3 nodes, just because someone liked Ruby.
Your metrics for happines, clear code, easy to understand and flexible are subjective; personally, with Ruby, I was unhappy, the code was mostly messy, hard to undestand, ad very rigid.
You don't think there's anything holier-than-thou about idea that Ruby is one of the happiest languages to code in? Is the hardly subtle implication that engineers who care about performance can't possibly care about readability really going in on this respectfully?
What are the metrics for programmer happiness? How did you collect your data? What's your sample size? How can you even begin to honestly substantiate that claim beyond "I like it and everyone who insists on using it despite it's demonstrable problems likes it."
Everyone who insists on writing C# likes it, and people who insist on writing Elm are convinced that functional programming is obviously the most pleasant. Some people still swear by Ada.
Ruby is one language of many that allows you to write readable code.
And while there are languages that make it hard to write readable code; there are zero languages that make it hard to write unreadable code. Ruby doesn't even make writing unreadable code the least bit difficult.
I once was stuck on a rails error for 2 hours because I typed validate instead of validates. Any compiled language's editor would have caught that as soon as I typed it. Ruby was able to spin up the whole app and run indefinitely without ever feeling the need to say "BTW, I don't know what that method is."
Is "Please Stop using Ruby" a click-bait headline? For sure.
Are some of his criticisms of the language valid? Absolutely.
So yeah, this should have definitely been titled something like "Considerations to take into account before starting your next web project as Ruby on Rails"
validate is also a claim method in rails. Your example does not prove your point at all. It just shows you don't know rails well enough. Sorry, couldn't let someone be wrong on the internet. 😂
I never said "Ruby is one of the happiest languages to code in". I said it's primary focus is "developer happiness', which is direct from Matz.
I think the fact that RoR is the de facto on-ramp for most devs coming out of boot camps says a lot for its accessibility. Is Ruby the happiest language? Highly unlikely! People are made happy for all sorts of reasons.
My whole point was addressing the obviously craven title and the nasty habit people have for shitting on other peoples' tools. Write your next app in mindf*ck for all I care. If that's what makes you happy and it does the job, great! The idea, however, well all need these super-concurrent, ultra-fast, functionally-programmed, EVERYTHING-less apps is silly. Very little of what most of us do is a) that serious and b) even going to be around in 5 years.
You’re absolutely right that shitting on people’s tools is bad.
I don’t know that i’m aware of sufficient evidence to agree that “what most of us do is [not serious enough for the performance concerns to matter].” And the claim that what most of us are doing isn’t going to be around in 5 years disagrees with my experience. Anecdotal I know, but a company a worked for until recently still maintains and adds new features to and ASP classic application.
I certainly agree that languages/frameworks persist. I work on a team as the only RoR guy with a bunch of Java developers. We have services in C# all over the place. All the more reason to cease and desist with the "mine is bigger than yours" malarkey.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
So...respectfully, I am going to go in on this.
I really feel like we need to slow our roll on shit-talking Ruby on Rails. Very few of us are ever going to have to worry about scale on a level where Ruby‘s raw performance metrics are going to be that impactful. Plus, let us not forget one of the main tenets of Ruby: programmer happiness.
I did not go to school for CS, so I don’t have the acquired taste for FP that a lot of folks have, I guess. I’m a digital carpenter; I want the code to be clear, easy to understand and flexible. Ruby is one of the best for that.
If you really think that you’re going to be managing 1M connections on one node a la Elixir (WhatsApp), go for it. That said, let’s keep the click-baity holier-than-thou hot takes to a minimum.
sry...but do you think that this code is easy to understand:
vowelsCount = Hash['aeiou'.chars.map{|n| [ n, 0 ]}]
gets.chomp.chars.each{|n| vowelsCount[n] += 1 if vowelsCount.key?(n)}
I am doubt.
You can write unintelligible nonsense in any language, my dude. Ruby's focus is "developer happiness", and I feel that it delivers. If you prefer to make yourself miserable, Java will welcome you with open arms.
Just here to say that I love your "digital carpenter" phrase! Adopting it ASAP! 😆😆
IDK man. I am in like 7th company in my life, ranging from 10k employees to the current startup of 100, and in all of them, the apps deal with thousands of parallel connections. And it is big difference if your hourly batch takes 15 minutes on JVM or 3 hours on Ruby, because then you need to write your app as parallel right away (something not easy to do in Ruby) and them run it on 3 nodes, just because someone liked Ruby.
Your metrics for happines, clear code, easy to understand and flexible are subjective; personally, with Ruby, I was unhappy, the code was mostly messy, hard to undestand, ad very rigid.
You don't think there's anything holier-than-thou about idea that Ruby is one of the happiest languages to code in? Is the hardly subtle implication that engineers who care about performance can't possibly care about readability really going in on this respectfully?
What are the metrics for programmer happiness? How did you collect your data? What's your sample size? How can you even begin to honestly substantiate that claim beyond "I like it and everyone who insists on using it despite it's demonstrable problems likes it."
Everyone who insists on writing C# likes it, and people who insist on writing Elm are convinced that functional programming is obviously the most pleasant. Some people still swear by Ada.
Ruby is one language of many that allows you to write readable code.
And while there are languages that make it hard to write readable code; there are zero languages that make it hard to write unreadable code. Ruby doesn't even make writing unreadable code the least bit difficult.
I once was stuck on a rails error for 2 hours because I typed
validateinstead ofvalidates. Any compiled language's editor would have caught that as soon as I typed it. Ruby was able to spin up the whole app and run indefinitely without ever feeling the need to say "BTW, I don't know what that method is."Is "Please Stop using Ruby" a click-bait headline? For sure.
Are some of his criticisms of the language valid? Absolutely.
So yeah, this should have definitely been titled something like "Considerations to take into account before starting your next web project as Ruby on Rails"
validate is also a claim method in rails. Your example does not prove your point at all. It just shows you don't know rails well enough. Sorry, couldn't let someone be wrong on the internet. 😂
"I don't know rails well enough" exactly proves my point when the opposing point is "rails is a productive framework and makes developers happy!"
I never said "Ruby is one of the happiest languages to code in". I said it's primary focus is "developer happiness', which is direct from Matz.
I think the fact that RoR is the de facto on-ramp for most devs coming out of boot camps says a lot for its accessibility. Is Ruby the happiest language? Highly unlikely! People are made happy for all sorts of reasons.
My whole point was addressing the obviously craven title and the nasty habit people have for shitting on other peoples' tools. Write your next app in mindf*ck for all I care. If that's what makes you happy and it does the job, great! The idea, however, well all need these super-concurrent, ultra-fast, functionally-programmed, EVERYTHING-less apps is silly. Very little of what most of us do is a) that serious and b) even going to be around in 5 years.
You’re absolutely right that shitting on people’s tools is bad.
I don’t know that i’m aware of sufficient evidence to agree that “what most of us do is [not serious enough for the performance concerns to matter].” And the claim that what most of us are doing isn’t going to be around in 5 years disagrees with my experience. Anecdotal I know, but a company a worked for until recently still maintains and adds new features to and ASP classic application.
I certainly agree that languages/frameworks persist. I work on a team as the only RoR guy with a bunch of Java developers. We have services in C# all over the place. All the more reason to cease and desist with the "mine is bigger than yours" malarkey.