Have you ever come across Smalltalk or Lisp programmers? You know, these people who, no matter what you tell them, will always respond that "Smalltalk did that twenty years ago" or that "Nothing has been invented since Lisp".
(...)
I believe that in ten years from now, people will look back at Ruby on Rails and will have the same reaction. I'm not sure what Web frameworks we will have by then, but I'm quite convinced that a lot of the current Ruby on Rails fanatics will have the same kind of attitude: "That's nice, but Ruby on Rails already did this ten years ago, and better".

(sobre Ruby) it's a complex language that contains a lot of advanced idioms which will be very hard for PHP and Visual Basic programmers to absorb.

I am worried that Ruby on Rails will do to the Ruby world what JUnit did to Java: a great tool when it came out but which condemned its community to an ice age where no innovation or competition appeared for years. Whatever the fate of Ruby, I hope its fans will keep an open mind and will constantly challenge the Rails way, for the simple reason that it's always healthy to question what's in place, no matter how good it looks.

Maurício Linhares wrote:O pior de Ruby pra mim hoje é que não tem como fazer rodar nos Tomcats da vida que eu tenho aqui e convencer o pessoal a sair de Java pra Ruby agora é simplesmente impossível...

Maurício Linhares wrote:Se Ruby em si não for pro mainstream (o que é realmente possível, mas é uma pena...) pelo menos a comunidade vai ter a chance de aplicar o que se aprendeu por lá em outros projetos, como o Grails.

O pior de Ruby pra mim hoje é que não tem como fazer rodar nos Tomcats da vida que eu tenho aqui e convencer o pessoal a sair de Java pra Ruby agora é simplesmente impossível...

Daniel Quirino Oliveira wrote:2. Se você quiser, pode tentar usar o JRuby on Rails (http://headius.blogspot.com/2006/03/progress-update-march-9.html). Mas, mesmo assim, se sua equipe não for capaz de absorver Ruby (não adianta! não é todo mundo que está preparado para aprender linguagens o tempo todo), melhor nem tentar.

Daniel Quirino Oliveira wrote:1. Se RoR não virar mainstream, pelo menos ele já serviu para dar uma mexida na comunidade Java, que estava muito folgada e acostumada com complexidade excessiva. Portanto, concordo com o Maurício.

Daniel Quirino Oliveira wrote:Mas, mesmo assim, se sua equipe não for capaz de absorver Ruby (não adianta! não é todo mundo que está preparado para aprender linguagens o tempo todo), melhor nem tentar.

My hopes for JRuby's future are starting to take shape.

Recently, I encountered more issues with JRuby's performance being a bit lacking. Actually, let's just say it: JRuby is really slow right now. A microbenchmark recently posted to the ruby-talk mailing list implemented a brute-force Sudoku-solving aogorithm. The original poster's compared Ruby's performance to native C code; where the C code took seconds to run, the Ruby version of the algorithm took over half a minute.

Again, Ruby's struggles with performance are widely known. It's also obvious that Ruby's creators and developers are aware of these issues, since many core libraries are implemented in C and since Ruby 2.0 will boast a new interpreter and Vitual Machine as well as many VM features comparable to those in Java and .NET's runtimes.

Naturally, curious how JRuby would perform on this benchmark--and with full awareness that JRuby's performance is far from spectacular--I ran it and waited for a result.

And waited. And waited.

After a few minutes, I killed the VM, assuming that there was something broken in JRuby that prevented the algorithm from terminating successfully. I did a bit of debugging, traced into the very depths of JRuby's evaluator, and found nothing. As far as I could tell, progress was being made and the algorithm was moving forward. My findings warranted another run.

JRuby took over 800 seconds to complete the benchmark, around 13.6 minutes.

I will admit the realization that JRuby is an order of magnitude slower than C Ruby came as a bit of a shock to me. There are many definitions of slow; Ruby's "slow" is for most purposes "fast enough". Java's "slow" is in most cases much faster than is required, and in some cases faster than native C code. JRuby's "slow", it would seem, is a different beast altogether.

I am worried that Ruby on Rails will do to the Ruby world what JUnit did to Java

saoj wrote: Suporte a REGEX direto na linguagem

saoj wrote: Métodos que retornam mais de uma variável

(int x, char c) = getWhatever();

saoj wrote:int x = int("3");

saoj wrote: E um novo pacote javap.* (java pragmático)

diego_sl wrote:O JRuby na minha opinião ainda ta beeeem longinho de poder se usado em produção, mas não deixa se ser um projeto beem legal.

I am worried that Ruby on Rails will do to the Ruby world what JUnit did to Java

TOMARA que não.

Ah, o Adam fez um post resposta.

saoj wrote:
Suporte a REGEX direto na linguagem como Perl e Ruby. Quero poder fazer isso:

if (x =~ /^\s$/) { } // sem escapar a barra !!!! ou s = s/\n//g; // sem escapar a barra !!!

saoj wrote:
Métodos que retornam mais de uma variável

(int x, char c) = getWhatever();

saoj wrote:
E um novo pacote javap.* (java pragmático), onde tenhamos coisas como:

String[] lines = File.read("sergio.txt"); int x = int("3");

Acho que daria para concorrer com o Ruby...

String[] lines = File.read("sergio.txt");