14 Mar, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
flumpy said:
Well by shortcut I mean 3 lines of code to write out a file to disk instead of about 30..

OK, but why is it bad to only need 3 lines to do something rather than 30?

flumpy said:
So all I was trying to point out is that some people are used to this security blanket and need convincing to let it go, eg some dev managers

This seems to be more of a social problem than a technical one, to be honest.

FWIW, where I work we use dynamic languages (chiefly Perl and Python) to drive the logic for managing multi-billion dollar portfolios… ironically perhaps, many of these dev managements you speak of probably don't work with anything near that amount of resources. It's ok to fear something if you fear it rationally (and frankly there are problems with dynamic languages when you have very large groups writing code in very many modules) but there's also a lot of what is basically FUD and somewhat irrational "gut feeling fear" out there. So that's why I say that a lot of this is a social rather than technical problem.
14 Mar, 2010, flumpy wrote in the 22nd comment:
Votes: 0
Re 3 vs 30 No, it isn't bad, that's what I mean! Sheesh

And I entirely agree about the social vs technical thing but that was also what I was trying to say: attitudes are hard to change.
14 Mar, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 23rd comment:
Votes: 0
I guess. It's a little unclear to me what you originally meant though because you were saying it was nice enough but not what something else gives you.

Re: attitudes, well, that's always a problem with everything. I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's not an argument against language X if developers from language Y can't handle change. (If anything, it's an argument in favor of momentum no matter what, even if changing would actually bring you concrete benefits in the long run.) Perhaps it's why many banks and other early computer adopters still have code running in COBOL an' stuff.
14 Mar, 2010, Tyche wrote in the 24th comment:
Votes: 0
flumpy said:
Well, it was that slide and that assumption that I think he got all wrong. If he thinks because ruby was easy for him and will be easy for others dismissing the reliance on autocompletion and other ide features then I question the rest of the article too. No one's saying ruby isn't powerful or useful, just very very alien. All the rest of the coolness gets lost in the wtf's of the "alien environment" you're forced to use.


I don't think he mentioned IDEs and autocompletion at all, let alone dismissing them. The slides are about differences in the languages. AFAIK, Ruby is has varying levels of support (some include autocompletion) in a number of IDEs like Eclipse, Textmate, VIM, Steel, Aptava, Emacs, and probably more.
14 Mar, 2010, flumpy wrote in the 25th comment:
Votes: 0
Well it was about a year ago I used ruby on windoze, so..

And you omitted my edit in yor post there…
20.0/25