The Programmer Hierarchy

[Trans]

http://www.hermann-uwe.de/files/images/programmer_hierarchy.png

 

[znmeb]

http://www.hermann-uwe.de/files/images/programmer_hierarchy.png

The only problem with that chart is that there should be *three* languages in
the top row -- Lisp, Assembler and Forth.

 

[Jeremy McAnally]

I hope they know that Ruby isn't a web language...

 

[David Vallner]

--------------enig44C75AFDECCC989D435E5935
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I hope they know that Ruby isn't a web language...
=20

It's probably a reference to the huge number of Java and PHP expats Ruby
has attracted recently. (Though that seems to have shifted to GUI
programmers and Windows automation people recently. The former might
have something to do with the Ajax hype receding, the latter seems to be
a stable base of relatively nontechnical users.)

David Vallner


--------------enig44C75AFDECCC989D435E5935
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFFkkoUy6MhrS8astoRAstYAJ9U3gPg6kd5ohcu1mPBFlzIl9OCKgCfYco+
h5WYCleSTRQbfqZDhkI7Mw4=
=wLYk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig44C75AFDECCC989D435E5935--

 

[Trans]

Anyway, I'm pretty sure Trans meant for it to be a joke. Laugh, it was
funny.

Indeed! I should have put a big smiley on my post

Just to be clear I didn't create it --just thought it was funny enough
to share. Rather, it was found deep down in the blog server of one "Uwe
Hermann". And I imagine the web lanaguage reference is really just a
joke about the huge impact Rails has had on "popularizing" Ruby.

Enjoy,
T.

 

[dblack]

Hi --

I hope they know that Ruby isn't a web language...

I'd say the evidence is that they don't.

All I can say is that I saw the Ruby/Rails confusion coming from a
mile away -- shades of "PERL/CGI" -- and I wrote a book to help people
get it right. I'd like to think it's helping, though clearly there
are still consciousnesses left to raise.


David

--
Q. What is THE Ruby book for Rails developers?
A. RUBY FOR RAILS by David A. Black (http://www.manning.com/black)
(See what readers are saying! http://www.rubypal.com/r4rrevs.pdf)
Q. Where can I get Ruby/Rails on-site training, consulting, coaching?
A. Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)

 

[David Vallner]

--------------enig112A20EE258C60395FCC1402
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jason Mayer wrote a touchy rant.

Huh?

My, my, aren't we extrapolating into extremes a bit?

David Vallner


--------------enig112A20EE258C60395FCC1402
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFFkwl9y6MhrS8astoRAm4LAJwKalz6pZO0TGM7batrh/+Eaz0+2gCfdsHz
exrp+prsIM4zl12l3SSrj+0=
=qZvm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig112A20EE258C60395FCC1402--

 

[Giles Bowkett]

I hope they know that Ruby isn't a web language...

I'd say the evidence is that they don't.

All I can say is that I saw the Ruby/Rails confusion coming from a
mile away -- shades of "PERL/CGI" -- and I wrote a book to help people
get it right. I'd like to think it's helping, though clearly there
are still consciousnesses left to raise.

I have to say, that's a very worthy cause, I just hope it isn't so
noble as to be tragically doomed, which I sometimes think it might
indeed be. There's the possibility of a very mixed blessing on the
horizon for Ruby programmers -- a huge quantity of bad Rails code
written by well-intentioned people who figured "hey, this programming
stuff is easier than I thought." On the one hand, writing Ruby for a
living might be a lot easier to do in the future, but it might not be
as fun as it is now.

 

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

There's the possibility of a very mixed blessing on the
horizon for Ruby programmers -- a huge quantity of bad Rails code
written by well-intentioned people who figured "hey, this programming
stuff is easier than I thought."

You mean like the mounds of bad FORTRAN and COBOL that are about to
become a national disgrace because the people who wrote and maintain
them are retiring and the young folks don't want to learn those "old
fogey" languages?

Speaking of which, I have actually seen a FORTRAN code recently (though
I refuse to embarrass the maintainer by revealing its name) that uses
three-branch IF statements!

IF (I) 100, 200, 300

IIRC gfortran accepts it with a warning.

 

[Matt Rose]

Hi --



I'd say the evidence is that they don't.

I wouldn't worry about that too much. Perl was mainly a "web
language" in it's early stages as well. Any language can be a "web
language", but the ones that are easy to use are particularly
effective as web languages. I would take it as a compliment.

Matt

 

[dblack]

Hi --

I wouldn't worry about that too much. Perl was mainly a "web language" in
it's early stages as well. Any language can be a "web language", but the
ones that are easy to use are particularly effective as web languages. I
would take it as a compliment.

It's not a compliment or an insult; it's just a mistake. I'd be happy
to participate in the author's education, if he's interested in
learning about Ruby and its community. He seems to have gotten hold
of the wrong end of the stick entirely.


David

Matt

--
Q. What is THE Ruby book for Rails developers?
A. RUBY FOR RAILS by David A. Black (http://www.manning.com/black)
(See what readers are saying! http://www.rubypal.com/r4rrevs.pdf)
Q. Where can I get Ruby/Rails on-site training, consulting, coaching?
A. Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)