Is it really Worth learning ruby?
Been reading The ruby programming language by oreilly and it just seems like the more I read the more unintuitive the language is. Should I keep reading /g/?
imo Ruby is dying. I switched from to Java to Ruby like 1 year ago because of a good offer and now i regret it. Ruby is also full of magic "goodies" which sometimes (often for me) can kill you hours debugging and trying to understand wtf is going on. Better Ruby devs maybe don't feel the same way...
Op here, the code looks overly complicated and the way you write expressions seems arbitrary. Like they put alot into making the language readable, but by doing so they make the code more complicated to write.
I dont even know how they managed that.
This t︂b︂︂h be honest faⅿ
It seems cool at first because you can condense like 20 lines of code to 5, but then it just become unreadable and a pain to debug. You can mitigate these problems by writing in a more C or Python style, but at that point, why not just use Python which gets about the same performance, has more packages available, and has more career opportunities?
One good thing about Ruby is that it's run by nips so it will never be overtaken by SJWs. That's pretty much the only advantage it has over python though. The way it tries to put syntatic sugar on everything makes things extremely unintuitive to newcomers the same way Haskell and Coffeescript does.
Don't learn ruby. Learn a decent language like c, c++, c#, or Java. If you want a interpreted language for some stupid reason then learn python if you are a retarded baby, otherwise learn perl6 or pike. Possibly php7 if your a web fag and like the CoC shoved in your face.
Hey, /g/. New to the board.
I went to school for IT back in 2009-2012, couldn't get a job with it, and retained nothing. Looking to brush up with the hopes of getting in somewhere as a generic code monkey, or do freelance work until I get a portfolio built up. I retain a little Java, but I was wondering where would be the best (read: most lucrative) place to start language-wise?
Probably unrelated to the topic at hand, but I thought this was a question that didn't really deserve its own thread.
>learn all these shitty languages only used by pajeets on h1b visas so you're unemployable
no thanks ackmed
Ruby 3.0: Will it be a hit?
Its a list of languages to choose from. I know everyone of those languages besides perl6 and php7, but I do know perl5, php5, visual basic+.net, bash, powershell, basic, scheme a little, and several shell ad DSL languages. OP probably want to make money that doesn't involve begging for welfare from his mum so I suggested some.
If you're worried about Pajeet Shitdik the your a shitty or lazy dev.
Just pick a language and stick with it.
You can't go wrong as long as you keep learning. There is always a use for any language and /g/ is the worst place to ask for advice as it is full of people who can't see past their own language.
If you only want to make websites, why not. Just start focusing on technique and correct practices. I have no idealet me look. Here I found this http://www.phptherightway.com/ it looks alright from a cursory inspection. That should get you started.
PHP is extremely backwards by 2016 standards. If you do any kind of web-work, do yourself a favour and learn Ruby+Rails, or Node.js+Express. You can seriously get a 5-10x productivity multiplier with more modern technology
>or is phython and php more viable?
Ruby, Python and PHP? Viable? What are you even asking for? All three of them run hundreds of major websites and thousands of smaller ones. Serious question: what does viability mean to you? Is your goal employment? A personal project? Meeting your Programmer Waifu/Husbando at a conference or users group?
If you were talking about something older-but-uncommon like OCaml, Erlang or Haskell, or something new/promising-yet-immature like Nim, Julia or Elixir, you could slice the pie and squint at it and make a claim it's not "viable to learn". None of the three you mentioned are going away any time soon.
For anyone else reading, please realize that "Rails or Express" is a very apples-to-oranges comparison. Express is a fairly terse library that doesn't make too many prescriptions whereas Rails is an opinionated framework. The equivalent of Express in Ruby-land is something like Rack (or Sinatra on top of Rack). The equivalent of Rails for Node is Sails (and depending on our definition, maybe Meteor).
I don't disagree with >>52624077, btw. PHP a shit, but just want to point out that the recommendations are a little mismatched.
Thanks for the clarification, I'm actually heavily invested in Rails and don't know a lot about Node.js, so I was guessing what the equivalent might be for Node.
My recommendation still stands for Rails over PHP though, the judicious use of ruby gems is enough to turn a project that might usually take me weeks into an afternoon project.
>PHP is extremely backwards by 2016 standards.
This is true but it doesn't matter. There are alot of jobs. Slightly lower pay, but you'll never be unemployed.
>If you do any kind of web-work, do yourself a favour and learn Ruby+Rails, or Node.js+Express.
This is a bad idea.
>Slightly lower pay
In my experience substantially lower, plus my personal happiness factors into my equation of what job to pick, and being forced to use PHP is detrimental to my happiness and job satisfaction.
>RoR is DOA
Absolutely ridiculous, RoR is maybe no longer 'cool' but it's just as productive a platform to work with as ever. RoR has so many advantages over any PHP framework it's not funny - between gems, generators, migrations, pre-compiled assets, mailers, massive amount of community support (every web service under the sun has a gem and a quickstart guide), it's probably the sanest place to do web development currently.
Rails has entered the "middle age" of frameworks, also know as the years of quiet productivity. They're not breaking any new boundaries, and there's little to rave about, but there are thousands of companies hiring Senior Rails devs and people starting new projects in it because it's a dependable, known quantity for producing API backends and simple CRUD-applications. The bleeding edge web hipsters will move on, but there are still thousands of companies who have line-of-business needs and would kill for a no-frills solution built in something predictable as Rails.
Worked as a ruby dev for a web startup a few years back. It was pretty fun until they hired a bunch of autists who kept trying to reinvent everything to match the new hip fandangled tool of the month. Constantly chasing things and putting out resultant fires burned me out so much I eventually left.
Also done a few other things with ruby, but generally the big problem I find is this: unless you write everything yourself, shit is going to probably break within the first year you write it unless you tie everything down using gem bundles and ruby environments (and even then it'll still break if you need to introduce new gems). Consistency and stability are words every ruby dev ignores.
For me the floor sort of fell out of the whole ruby thing when a guy was doing a presentation at euruko about some cocoa thing in the most flamboyant over the top way possible with backing singers. Then I realized I had inadvertently fooled myself into joining a clown circus.
Ruby itself isn't inherently bad, but the community surrounding it... is toxic. Ignore everything outside the standard library or which you cant easily include (without introducing dependency hell), and you might make it out alive.
>RoR is DOA
>Dead On Arrival
>A project that has been around for 10 years and powers hundred-million-dollar companies is dead on "arrival".
You sound a little foolish.
The real lesson is bigger than Ruby: at a job the environment is more important than the language, and the wrong environment/team can make your life suck, no matter what technologies are involved. I've worked a company where none of us were in the "Ruby community" and it was awesome, because we just got shit done in a language that we all thought matched the way we think about problems.
>Consistency and stability are words every ruby dev ignores.
So have some standards be the Ruby dev who doesn't. The problem is more likely because you were at a startup. Those places, almost by definition, sacrifice engineering fundamentals for "iteration speed" and growth.
>I've worked a company where none of us were in the "Ruby community"
Sorry, I should have made that more clear:
>I worked at a company *that used Ruby* where none of us were in the "Ruby community"
>a presentation at euruko about some cocoa thing in the most flamboyant over the top way possible with backing singers
You got a video link?
>In my experience substantially lower,
In my experience slightly lower. Its almost like were different people who've had different jobs. Last time I worked with PHP was 2008ish so maybe its changed or maybe..
> and being forced to use PHP
...your just a baby.
>is detrimental to my happiness and job satisfaction.
Which is important, but grow up buttercup.
>Absolutely ridiculous, RoR is maybe no longer 'cool' but it's just as productive a platform to work with as ever.
Yet barely anyone uses it and the market is flooded with devs.
>RoR has so many advantages over any PHP framework
Then prove it Sally.
> between gems, generators, migrations, pre-compiled assets, mailers, massive amount of community support (every web service under the sun has a gem and a quickstart guide),
So literally nothing special over something like larvel(sp?) except a jewelry box full of gems.
>it's probably the sanest place to do web development currently.
Its not even a place. Your just regurgitating marketing drivel aren't you. Promoting forward synergy?
>Last time I worked with PHP was 2008ish so maybe its changed or maybe..
It has absolutely changed, and RoR devs generally get paid extremely generous salaries. A friend of mine contracts RoR for 200-250k p/a. The only PHP jobs available are usually entry level.
>Which is important, but grow up buttercup.
Life's too short to work with shit technologies where the original author literally admits that it's a shitpile.
>I'm not a real programmer. I throw together things until it works then I move on. The real programmers will say "yeah it works but you're leaking memory everywhere. Perhaps we should fix that." I'll just restart apache every 10 requests.
>Rasmus Lerdorf - creator of PHP
>Yet barely anyone uses it
Just factually wrong, it's the 10th most popular language on the planet http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
>Then prove it Sally.
>Every other aggressive idiot thing you wrote
I actually can't be bothered. If you're so determined to use PHP, a language which was outdated in 2009, then I have no interest in stopping you.
>DOOT DO DOO DOOT DOOT DOO DO DOOT
Ruby is popular according to specifically crafted search terms that aren't indicative of actual usage. Just look at the graph, php is more popular than ruby.
Its annoying that your comparing the language php to the framework ruby on rails. That's why I brought larvel into the discussion. I've never used it, but a quick google and that what most are using. So either compare ruby to php, or ruby on rails to larvel.
What does RoR do better than Larvel?
>Ruby is popular according to specifically crafted search terms that aren't indicative of actual usage. Just look at the graph, php is more popular than ruby.
I'm not sure why you're trying to argue this, Ruby is extremely popular by any measure - see http://githut.info/ for analysis on public github repos.
PHP is popular because there's millions of legacy applications out there that need to be maintained. Doesn't mean you should take any of these jobs if you can avoid them, or heaven forbid, start a new PHP project in 2016.
>Its annoying that your comparing the language php to the framework ruby on rails
My experience with PHP is with Zend, Symfony and Code Igniter, which are shitpiles of over-engineering and user-unfriendliness compared to Rails.
>What does RoR do better than Larvel?
I have no idea, and I don't care, not being associated with PHP is good enough for me. Whatever framework you use, you're eventually going to have to deal with PHP standard library functions which are all basically c functions except with weird parameter ordering, stupid quirks that you have to remember or flat-out don't work like they should. I left that behind years ago and so should you, and stop being contrarian for the sake of it.
op here, I think the books just shit cause it just gets worse and worse.
Im actually doing a personal project. Im still in school so im dicking around. Im probably going to focus more on languages like c# or java because i want to focus more on apps than web design. My first venture into programming was php so i really only know web design
>or heaven forbid,
Sorry darling, I didn't mean to upset you.
>I have no idea, and I don't care,
So your just a shit talker, who pulls facts out of their ass.
>Whatever framework you use
I haven't used php in almost 10 years.
>you're eventually going to have to deal with PHP standard library functions which are all basically c functions
PHP is written in c yes, but so is you beloved ruby which you defend so proudly.
>except with weird parameter ordering, stupid quirks that you have to remember or flat-out don't work like they should.
Yeah its PHP, I never said it was good. You probably have me confused with your dad.
> I left that behind years ago
We have so much in common.
>and so should you, and stop being contrarian for the sake of it.
And your feisty.
>more on apps than web design
By "apps" do you mean desktop applications or mobile apps?