Ruby really isn't sufficiently different from Python to make it a worthwhile third language, is it? Maybe a sixth or seventh language, after C, C++, Erlang, f77 and Assembly.
Ruby is, on the surface, not very different from Python. But in terms of philosophy, coding style, and community it is like night and day. There is more to a language than syntax and core libraries. Every language uniquely expresses its communities particular bias on How To Solve That Hard Problem.
In this regard, Python and Ruby could not be more diametrically opposed. Ruby values elegance and terseness, sometimes to the detriment of readability. Python actively eschews some elegant features to ensure readability. They feel very different.
If you want something more esoteric to teach you more purist OO (of which Python is definitely not), then Smalltalk would be the next step forward after Ruby.
From my limited experience with Ruby, I'd say it would be a step backwards for someone who knows Python. It will largely show them how things are done awkwardly in another language while attempting to solve similar problems. Something like C, as other posts have suggested, would teach a lot more in the same period of time.
I don't mean to diss Ruby too hard, but I don't see the points here as strong enough to detract from an argument for learning C.
Both Ruby and Python's approaches are beautiful, just in different ways. The reason I suggest learning Ruby is because in learning to see that you'll see why, and be a better programmer for it.
And that isn't an argument _against_ C. Everyone needs to learn C. Go for it. But I think that Python and Ruby programmers stand at a distance and both look down on each other, and most of that is because of social and not technical reasons. Pythonistas spout crap about readability and Rubyists spout crap about OO-ness. Both have something to teach.
You might get angry reading this comment and say, "That KirinDave is so arrogant! He's implying I'm _not_ a good programmer and that by learning Ruby I will be a better one." But really you're the one who opened that can of worms by saying "a step backwards for someone who knows Python", and talking about "awkwardness." By saying that, you've basically said that thousands and thousands of smart programmers are totally wrong and wasting their time.
And it's not true. The programming language that's so bad it has nothing to teach is a rare bird indeed. Ruby and Python are so instructive because of how similar-yet-different they are.
One of the "interesting" things I see in ruby is that people are happy to accept any suitable way of doing something, whereas in python there is general demand for more language or official support.
eg Ruby has no named params, no biggie, just use the convention that you pass around hashmaps, something like
foo :bar => 42 etc etc....
close enough for rocknroll. In python they wouldn't necessarily like that, and named params are available (I am just making this up, they could have been in there for the start, but my point remains...)
It's ok man. No need to have a flame-war here. I consider anyone with a different viewpoint to be offering an argument against my pov. It's not vicious or aggressive, but still an argument. :)
I'm down to have the debate in another forum if you'd like. It's a good chance to learn some more about Ruby.
I also have some limited knowledge of ruby and i decidet not to learn it yet because i just don't like how it feels. I noticed that there are a lot of method calls in the tutorial i read. Something like object.method1.method.2 and from python i know that if you have more than one dot, you are mistaking somewhere. It might not be a mistake in Ruby, i know its supposed to look like UNIX pipes, but it just doesn't feel right. I wouldn't call it a step backwards though, for someone it might be, but for others ruby is superior, i just like python better and i will learn ruby some day. But for now C it is, but i will read my scheme book to the end first(its only 99 pages long).
yeah, i started to read a ruby tutorial and in 20 minutes i stopped, i might learn it if i have to. I do own a K&R ANSI C, and i thought of reading it, but didn't find low level programing as fun as python. I will learn it eventually, but i won't learn assembly, C is as low level as i will go. I've been thinking of learning smalltalk any opinions?
I do own a K&R ANSI C, and i thought of reading it, but didn't find low level programing as fun as python. I will learn it eventually
This is why I reckon it's better to learn C before you learn any of the higher-level scripting-type languages. Same reason you should learn to drive a manual before you learn to drive an automatic.
(Of course in both cases I'm just advising people to do the same thing that I did, which is always the weakest form of advice.)
"Core War (or Core Wars) is a programming game in which two or more battle programs (called warriors) compete for the control of the MARS virtual computer (Memory Array Redcode Simulator). These battle programs are written in an abstract assembly language called Redcode. The object of the game is to cause all processes of the opposing program(s) to terminate, leaving your program in sole possession of the machine."
Learning Smalltalk is a great idea, but be warned - its workflow is very different to most other languages (for example, it doesn't really have a command line in the same sense that Ruby or Python does). If you can get over the first couple of weeks of frustration, you'll probably learn a lot.
