Digging Deeper Into The Myths of Ruby vs. Java

I really like the Ruby Language but a lot of the nice features you find in Ruby you can do in Groovy. Groovy is a pretty easy sell to java programmers wanting to dip their feet into the dynamic programming world without completely learning an entire new language. That being said, JRuby is another viable option to build apps on the VM and I am grateful for yet another great language at my disposal.

many times i found author's reasoning not correct because he avoids mentioning serious shorcomings of ruby platform.

Ahmet, can you elaborate? Which shortcomings do you refer to?

In non trivial projects, the programming language used is what increases your productivity/performance/scalability etc...

I've lately became interested in dynamic languages and looked at both Ruby and Python.
After looking at both languages I find Python is much more in tune with the Java culture:

• Readability and explicitness - both Java and Python endorse clean readable code that explicitly states what is being done. Ruby for example, reminds me of Perl - a "write only" language. A language that might be very fun to write but might be very hard to maintain.


• Matureness - Python and Java are of almost the same age. They are mature languages that proved themselves again and again in production systems (e.g. YouTube).


• Vibrant community - both platforms have a devoted community and community process.


• Open source libraries - both platforms have a lot of librariesand frameworks available (a result of points 2 and 3).

"the programming language used is what increases your productivity/performance/scalability etc..."

This is simply not true.

Read F.P. Brooks. "No silver bullet" and you'l know what I'm talking about.

In my experience god OO solutions and god communication is what matters.

I'm sorry to say that technical solutions seldom help much. If they did it would bee an easy way out. But there are no short cuts!

So what if it takes 30% less time to implement the wrong functionality. You have still implemented it. If you find a technique that helps you hit your target then that will be what makes the difference.

Hi Arnt, you quote out of context. The original quote was comparing the relative importance of languages and libraries. Nobody denies the importance of communication, or that no language will compensate for the wrong people and process.

The technique we use to hit the right target is a variant of Extreme Programming. We take less time to implement the right functionality.

The argument I am making about programming languages is not new, and you overstate Brooks. Of course there are shortcuts. Will these shortcuts turn a bad programmer or process into a good one? No. Will they make a good programmer or process better? Yes.

Hi Zeev, Python is a very nice language, and many people prefer it to Ruby. At Relevance, we have significant production experience in Java, Ruby, and Python. We current prefer Ruby for many tasks for the following reasons:

• Readability. Ruby's ability to created domain-specific languages without a parser allows us to quickly write code that is more readable than equivalent Java or Python code.


• Maturity. Ruby is older than Java.

Groovy is cool, there is a lot to like. But there are some worries too. We are guessing that JRuby is the better future direction, but are keeping our options open and doing work in both languages.

Regarding maturity - this is not an issue of which programming language is older but how much is it used in production environments. Ruby, until recently didn't have a very good VM and as far as I know there wasn't a proper language specification (heard that in an interview by the JRuby guys) - that doesn't sound mature to me.
Indeed this is changing now with the JRuby 1.0 announcement.

Hi Zeev, Python is a very nice language, and many people prefer it to Ruby. At Relevance, we have significant production experience in Java, Ruby, and Python. We current prefer Ruby for many tasks for the following reasons:

• Readability. Ruby's ability to created domain-specific languages without a parser allows us to quickly write code that is more readable than equivalent Java or Python code.


• Maturity. Ruby is older than Java.

All three languages in question have vibrant communities and plenty of open source libraries.

There is no Java vs Ruby. There are tackling different domains entirely.

Well, if a language is productive for the programmer and the guy codes 30% of wrong functionality then its a problem of inefficiency of the system analyst.
Secondly, a productive language helps a programmer read the code, identify the code for wrong functionality, undo the code and write a new supposedly correct code in place of the previous one in a shorter amount of time with less worries and with slush and fruit cake :-)

Zeev: The maturity point was humor. Of course the age of a language does not mean it is mature. Wonder where I got that idea? :-)

Hi Stuart, I don’t think my quote is out of context. Although I think you make some good points. You state that “Nobody denies the importance of communication, or that no language will compensate for the wrong people and process.” Well this is true, but the overly focus on programming languages tend to diminish the importance of these factors. It’s very easy to get techies in a heated discussion about programming languages, but does it really mater that much? How much productivity can you gain?

As the original post states “In non trivial projects, the programming language used is what increases your productivity/performance/scalability etc.”

Well if my post is out of context, this is out of context, because this doesn’t consider the relative importance of languages and libraries. It clearly states that language is the most important factor. This was my point. The overly focus on language often overshadows more important issues and make some people believe it’s the most important issue.

Hi
your confusing my post with what stuart has written(his post doesnt have the quote).Though i dont think you noticed the title of my post as myth #6.

I find such language comparisons very naive.
regards
deepak

Hi Arnt, I think we are both out of context. :-) You are quoting Deepak, not me. And Deepak's quote is intended as a myth.

Sorry my mistake I misunderstood. Thanks for the clarification.

Stuart, every language has something that will bother you. There is no perfect language. In any event, the worries you document aren't of any real consequence and the plusses of the language more than make up for it. Read Graeme's response. But hey, it's not Ruby so it will just never be as good, right? Also, you say that you thinnk JRuby is the better future direction but what makes true? I would say for the typical Java developer that Groovy is the obvious choice.