> My comment about future unicorns is mainly that
> Python might be dominant in AI or biotech focused
> startups
That's rubbish. Why should python excel here in biotech
related aspects but ruby not?
Note: I am a molecular biologist by trade who went
into using ruby primarily. I also use python a lot.
I remember the old HUGO project; lots of that code was
written in perl. So why exactly would ruby be unfit here
but python would? Please give your EXACT reasons.
> so Ruby might have had it's day as people are
> building early tech in new fields.
I partially agree in regards to javascript; I disagree
that there ought to be a hype-buzzword trend. The whole
fake AI field ticks me off - they don't understand why
they can never achieve true intelligence, yet they keep
on claiming it. And people parrot how python will be
DOMINATING in the fake AI field. So many fakers.
How many of you guys actually even understand neurobiology?
While this is not completely incorrect, it should be pointed out that they would have dumped e. g. python just as well, since the primary complaint is about speed.
Also, "dumped" is the wrong word, because you insinuate here that they stopped using ruby altogether. That is not the case; the percentage usage declined in relative terms, but I do not know of any of these companies to have gone down to zero percent in regards to ruby. Which is typical - big companies use all sorts of different languages.
> Alas, with most non-Ruby devs it is nearly impossible to compliment that
> brilliant, wonderful language (and Rails). It's become popular to look for a
> reason to hate a language you don't write in, and usually tech stacks are sold
> by putting down other stacks, like when NodeJS came out.
When it comes to speed, they have a point - there is just no contest between C and C++, when comparing it to ruby or python.
In my opinion, though, most of these who critisized ruby and python, are actually also people who are VERY very bad in either of these two languages. Some of them are still stuck with C and perl, too old to learn anything new. And no, the "I'm gonna learn a new language every week" crowd does not count - I have seen too much atrocious coding pattern by these people.
JavaScript is also a partial reason simply because of how important the www became - look at PHP's decline, which is a LOT due to JavaScript.
And of course, everyone understands the speed argument. But that has already been settled. Speed matters when speed is very important. I've seen people
recommend that I stop using Python and learn Rust to create a medium sized API. The average response times for the API that I had already completed was 30ms. That's a fraction of a second. I haven't used Rust yet, so I don't know what the performance difference would be, but why on earth should someone rewrite an application to save themselves a unit of time indiscernible to both the developer and the customer? Even if my load times increased a fair amount, nothing would be lost.
As far as people who don't mind learning another language, I can understand why that's fun, because it is. But when you have work that needs to get done and needs to be done with assurance, you don't have time to learn another language and figure out its quirks, shortcomings, and strengths all while trying to build that feature. My belief is that you should be able to write a language like a member of its community. If you don't have the intention of doing that, then you shouldn't really be messing with it. (for example, don't write Python like it's Ruby)
It has been my experience in New York City that people who criticize Ruby and Python tend to come from languages that are strongly typed and use them at work. It is cool to hate on a language because if you do, then you get to feel better about yourself just by subscribing to another community and hiding underneath that umbrella. You don't have to contribute to open source, answer questions online, or give talks at your local meetup. You get to call yourself a better engineer just by subscribing.
Anyway, I got way off topic. But the point is that when Ruby came out, there were plenty of options. People went with Ruby and Rails probably because it's a lot of fun to finish your work. I know that I really enjoy finishing my work.
Oh man, I just realized that my super-sensitive trackpad reorderd my words again. I was trying to say that Ruby gets "dumped on" by other developers. Not "dumped" as in swapped out.
Like you I dislike the way Zed has a tendency to group all Ruby people together and target them as a whole, when in reality his complaints would be better directed at a specific subset. I'm a Ruby dev (not a Rails one) and it stings when Zed fires his literary shotgun at Rails, and Ruby, standing next to Rails also gets hit.
But... this isn't about Zed being a dick. I was pointing out that there's also a massive amount of good stuff he's done as well. I'm not a fanboy of his (Zed has fanboys?) but I do have a fair bit of respect for his ability and what he has done, and his writing does nothing to diminish the quality of his work.
The comparison with DHH I thought was positive. DHH has strong opinions and (it appears) an ego to match, but can back it up with code.
That's rubbish. Why should python excel here in biotech related aspects but ruby not?
Note: I am a molecular biologist by trade who went into using ruby primarily. I also use python a lot.
I remember the old HUGO project; lots of that code was written in perl. So why exactly would ruby be unfit here but python would? Please give your EXACT reasons.
> so Ruby might have had it's day as people are > building early tech in new fields.
I partially agree in regards to javascript; I disagree that there ought to be a hype-buzzword trend. The whole fake AI field ticks me off - they don't understand why they can never achieve true intelligence, yet they keep on claiming it. And people parrot how python will be DOMINATING in the fake AI field. So many fakers.
How many of you guys actually even understand neurobiology?