is it really as elegant as people make it out to be?

>>106001490 (OP)
it's a dead end. don't waste your time.

>>106001490 (OP)
No, it's crap.
Honestly don't get what people saw in this and I guess I'm not the only one since it's now dead.

>>106001490 (OP)
I like Ruby, but I would never call it "elegant". Using "elegant" for a languages that aren't in the Lisp or ML families always feels like the wrong adjective.
The adjective I would use for Ruby is "comfy".

>>106001698
Good Morning Saar

>>106001490 (OP)
Ruby borrows too much from Perl but if you like Perl then it's all the better.

Ruby is great, don't listen to the haters. Sadly, it's not very much in demand anymore: the Web 2.0 bubble of the 2000s was what made it popular with Rails, but the Big Tech Jewish Chinamen who can't get hard unless it's statically typed Java with GoF threw a pissy fit that waaah waaah dynamically typed bad and threw it to the trash because they can't understand .map() and lambdas.

They also went "waaah waaah ruby doesn't scale", because they love to masturbate to mockito and selenium tests all day.

Ruby is great. Ruby on Rails is great. As a scripting language it's great. The only real weakness is no Hardware threads in MRI.

ruby is the 'you had to be there' of programming languages

>>106001858
I hate that I agree with this, but I do.

>>106001490 (OP)
Elegant means different things to different people
I do think the syntax is pretty and easy to read

>>106001851
>they can't understand .map() and lambdas.
this is how I know you don't know Java
>Ruby is great. Ruby on Rails is great. As a scripting language it's great.
> Sadly, it's not very much in demand anymore
This is why python is the number 1 currently in the tiobe index and is the high level horse power of Deeplearning.
While ruby companies and ruby devs focused all the energy on making ruby indoctrination bootcamps just for write mediocre web-applications. Other languages focused on general purpose without marrying an architectural pattern or goal.
Happily ruby and rails are dying, the next language that will suffer the same future sadly is elixir which is great for concurrent programming but these retarded mediocre monkeys are trying to shove it on every bodies throat.

>>106001490 (OP)
>rbenv
>asdf
>rvm
>chruby
>mise
>--with-openssl-dir (yeah needs to compile openssl with each version to fucking work)
A mess to install

You'll be working on legacy projects and rails only.

I repeat, you'll be working on legacy projects and rails only.

But I'll tell you what, it's a good language if you want to have a stable job, it's been paying the bills for a couple of years now.

Other than that, even PHP is much faster since since ruby is:
>slow
>memory hog

>>106002240
this and RoR teams are a nightmare for devops when they try to scale-up as enterprise, is like dealing with kids who wants to run everything in their own computers

inferior to lisp
inferior to smalltalk
ruby was a failed experiment.

>>106002291
inferior to prolog
inferior to python
is made in C so is inferior to C
JS even with workers can scale better than that shit
their community can't put something on production outside heroku by their self.
ruby is practically the cuck language if you think about it.

>>106001490 (OP)
>python but worse

>>106002320
>inferior to python
not really.

>>106001851
>They also went "waaah waaah ruby doesn't scale"
Usually that's because of bolting things together that really ought to never have been used at the same time. Process-per-request and in-memory caches (without shared memory)? Idiotic to mix those when dealing with resources that it's best to stream.
The result is services that take orders of magnitude more resources than they should, and that really pushes up costs.
I don't think it's really the language's fault. It's more a community practice thing.

I dislike Ruby for other reasons. I remember dealing with concatenating strings that came from files in different encodings, and ending up with corrupt output. That's just terrible and idiotic. Even erroring out in that situation is better.

>>106001490 (OP)
Ruby is a fun language, that supports different paradigms.
The elegance of the implementation depends on your writing.

dhh likes Ruby because he wouldn’t have been able to make something as handy as Rails in any other language
https://lexfridman.com/dhh-david-heinemeier-hansson/
Ruby is good for Rails and Homebrew and nothing else IMO

>>106001490 (OP)
Ruby is a beautiful language but I don't see it being used on anything other than maintaining legacy Rails apps.

>>106002221
>Java 8 good saar

>>106002291
>get things running, fix them later

the only one that actually matters, really. that picture is a self own, pyjeet

>>106002221
germanoid eurofag ESL

>>106002727
>>106002590
metasploit

ruby's also probably the best language to make a DSL in

>>106002841
>>106002864
whoever uses ruby is just coping
even COBOL is more popular in the tiobe index.

>>106002885
i like how the literally only argument against ruby - for years now - is a literal logical fallacy (appeal to popularity)

and it doesn't even apply to the ruby ecosystem. it's not like there aren't libraries for it, even libraries that haven't been updated in 5 years will perfectly fine because the language is like the 2nd or 3rd most stable language

only reason appeal to popularity can work against ruby is the number of jobs ads vs other languages but if that's your criteria what the fuck are you even doing on this board

>>106002961
>i like how the literally only argument against ruby - for years now - is a literal logical fallacy (appeal to popularity)
>only reason appeal to popularity can work against ruby is the number of jobs ads vs other languages but if that's your criteria what the fuck are you even doing on this board
top kek, you are the one here with poor reasoning skills.
Programming languages and technologies gets popular when they just "werks", your super stable gems are just a bunch of crap that under-perform compared to solutions in other languages.
Average Ruby dev can't do other thing outside simple monolithic low performance dashboards.

>>106003009
>performance

(7) The fallacy of non sequitur (“it does not follow”) occurs when there is not even a deceptively plausible appearance of valid reasoning, because there is an obvious lack of connection between the given premises and the conclusion drawn from them.

>>106003044
The only way to really understand why things are the way they are
is to actually be out there solving real engineering problems. Not just admiring the beauty of Ruby from a comfy blogpost.
When performance, scalability, ecosystem limitations and real world team constraints hit you
you stop romanticizing and start shipping.
Pretty syntax doesn't save you when the system's falling apart at 10k QPS.

We built and entire CICD orchestration system in Ruby that specifically deploys Erlang releases to FreeBSD + jails. 10/10 would DSL again. Ruby is max comfy.

>>106003174
implying is not a trivial task

>>106001490 (OP)
It gives you a lot of freedom, with makes it fun and cozy (troublesome when working with people)

>>106003514
>(troublesome when working with people)
you mean when you want to use it in a real job in a real project.

I didn't realize the definition of dead language was stable and predictable and easy to use and learn.

I wonder if TruffleRuby actually warrants its hype. Big Ruby players moved to jRuby and they seem to love it.

>>106001698
>No, it's crap.
Everything related to scheme is. People get so excited about the recursion and metaprogramming and it turns out that's a fucking nightmare to support in practice.

>>106001851
Ruby was miserably slow doe. It has improved a ton, but it used to be. You can even get respectable gains from the JVM nowadays.

Here are some of the things I like about it
>calling a shell program is as easy as enclosing it in `'s, as in curr_dir = `pwd`
>whitespace doesn't matter unlike in python where it is extremely important you get indentation right
>you can call/define a method without arguments by just leaving out the parentheses as in x = some_method or def some_method
>you can also call a method with arguments by leaving out the parentheses as in puts 'hi'
>hashes (dictionaries) are really tightly integrated to the point you can just write {"key" => "value"} or {:key => "value"} or {key: "value"} and it just werks without importing anything
>the naming of built in/common methods feels very unixy and generally more concise than python
>rails just werks for building quick and dirty REST/resource oriented APIs

Here's some shit I don't like
>not compiled/statically typed so have fun debugging shit at runtime, especially code running on a server where you don't have access to an IDE with modern conveniences like setting breakpoints, you have to deal with old school command line tools like irb and pry which is not always straightforward to use
>attr_getter and attr_setter are awfully long and arcane sounding for a very common language feature, an instance getter/setter

>>106006156
>>the naming of built in/common methods feels very unixy and generally more concise than python
Maybe I should have said C-like, but I don't really know C so I don't know if either of these things are true. It feels like the namings of things are based on some older thing like perl or something but I'm not qualified to say what exactly it's based on, it's just a vibe I get and I like that vibe

>>106001858
This, because you had to see what it was replacing.

>>106006156
Me again, adding a few more. Like:
>last line of a method gets returned so no need to put return in this case
Dislike:
>conditionals at the end of the expression they gate, like x = 1 if a == 2
>the unless keyword
>confusing ways to make use of class level (static) methods/attributes, see the class << self example at https://github.com/rubocop/ruby-style-guide?tab=readme-ov-file#defining-class-methods
>heredoc syntax
>the fact there's often several different methods that all do the same thing, like size vs length
>rails upgrades frequently break backwards compatibility and because it's an interpreted language, you won't know until runtime. Hope you covered your shit in unit tests and integration tests because otherwise it'll fail in production. Case in point: I work for a giant tech company, and several times we've had upgrades break because methods just no longer exist (you get a NoMethodError at runtime), or people make a typo and it's not caught until it runs, etc.

>>106001490 (OP)
It's a relic of the era where OOP was being treated as the miracle solution to all problems.

>>106002240
>installation
i have found rbenv to be okay.
>You'll be working on legacy projects and rails only.
this is the big one. no one would start in ruby/rails now.

>>106001769
>The adjective I would use for Ruby is "comfy".
Been using Ruby for years. Comfy is also the word I'd use. Any time I don't need high performance from something like C or Rust, or a very specific data science or AI library from Python, I'll use Ruby. It's the perfect language to hack together scripts that I'll write once and maybe run once or twice tops.

>>106003514
Forgot to make alternative example (freedom)

>>106001851
>Ruby borrows too much from Perl
>>106007356
>Tries appear clean and verbose
>Forgetful dev
>Throws a one liner in a rush

>>106001500
>write software in ruby
>time to distribute it
>all the solutions available to pack your ruby program into a portable exe are outdated or don't actually work with the libraries you're using.
it's also slow as fuck, if you're gonna make a full fledged game with it like I was trying to do you're going to regret it.

Fucking lua with lapis is a lot cleaner than this milenitroon crap

Isn't this a Java hosted language now?

>>106001490 (OP)
i got tricked into trying to learn programming with ruby and python as a kick because its what was in vogue at the time and it crippled me and i didnt recover until years later when i went to college and started learning real languages (even java is better than anything dynamic)

>>106009439 (me)
as a kid*

>>106005555 (checked)
Really makes you think, doesn't it?

>>106009430
Jruby is cringe and bluepilled. Jython is based and redpilled.

>>106009816
Jython has been dead for 13 years

>>106001490 (OP)
>ruby
2slow4me

>>106001490 (OP)
No, but it is objectively better than Python, which is why it had a following.
Lua is the actual elegant (and small, and fast) scripting language, but OOP cancer resulted in Python vs. Ruby instead.

>>106001851
>Ruby borrows too much from Perl but if you like Perl then it's all the better.
No. Perl was designed to replace sed/awk/grep and inherits unixisms.
But it is unreadable to the uninitiated, hence Python and Ruby sought to fix that with OOP and tear out the unixisms.

>>106012076
>Perl is unreadable to the uninitiated
It's often pretty bad to the initiated too.

One thing that made me sour on ruby was the stupid unless statement. Its just an inverted if statement. It is completely pointless and only there so people can be stylish.

>>106013386
any chance that your native language (for speaking) does not have "unless" in typically used vocabulary kek

>>106013419
My native language is English. I use code to speak to computer and I use English to speak to people. Unless changes the shape of code and makes it harder to parse at a glance. This for all no benefit.

>>106012076
>No, but it is objectively better than Python, which is why it had a following.
yet nobody cares , python is the king now that meme-ai is everywhere.

>>106001490 (OP)
I really like and I wish it was the default scripting language for everything.

>>106013454
>and makes it harder to parse at a glance
it makes it easier to parse at a glance if not you have retardation

>>106001490 (OP)
It's the most beautiful and expressive programming language ever. If only performance was better.

>>106013454
I guess it's not that often used in everyday english either
>>106013737
well there is reasoning involved in some situations like if a<5 vs unless a>=5 which seems kinda retarded to add as syntactic sugar, it's not handy