[ABE.pm] Re: [Lvlug] Re: Choosing between Ruby and Lisp

[Randy Kramer]

Faber,

Thanks for the reply (and the offer)! (more comments interspersed below)

All,

I welcome everyone's comments.

Randy Kramer

On Monday 03 January 2005 06:34 pm, Faber Fedor wrote:
> That's the problem I had.  

I take it you mean lack of libraries?  (vs. steeper learning curve?)

> A Lisp programmer who lives down the street 
> kept telling me to get Franz Lisp but that's a commercial package.

I'll look into Franz Lisp (check price, libraries, Linux compatibility, etc.).

> Somewhere around here I've got a CD from NYLISP group with various
> tutorials and the like on it.  If you want it I can try and find it.

I took a look, I thought I might have gotten a copy at one of the LinuxWorld 
expos, but I guess not.  I've found the nyc lispers (iirc) mail list and 
subscribed.  I'll probably ask some questions there, but I suspect I can find 
those same things on their site.  If you happen to be coming to an lvlug or 
similar meeting in this area in the near future (for any value of near), and 
you find the CD, bring it along (and let me know you're coming to that 
particular meeting so I show up).

PS: The impressions I'm starting to get about Lisp include:

   * It is extremely flexible, you can make it do anything you want.
   * The keyword may be "you" (can make it) -- doesn't sound like there are 
many (useful) prebuilt libraries (for widgets and the like, especially).
   * Lisp is clearly not one "language" but includes a lot of alternatives 
(Common, scheme (maybe), Franz, ...), so not only would I have to pick Lisp 
as my language, but which Lisp (and, iirc, there is some significant 
difference between Common Lisp and Scheme (like one supports some good 
sounding feature (continuations?) and the other doesn't).

On the other hand, I'm somewhat hesitant about Ruby.  I'm lurking on a lot of 
their mail lists, and seeing discussions (and debates/uncertainty (from 
"matz")) about features they want to add to 2.0.  If the language is so good 
(i.e., I would have assumed that meant well planned/thought out), why is he 
uncertain about these things.  Makes it sound like it is just another 
language that somebody threw together (and maybe even the best language so 
far), but people aren't quite sure of the limitations yet (because they 
haven't got that far).

Aside: Part of my quest is to learn only one more programming language.  I 
don't want to learn Ruby, and then find that I need to consider moving to the 
next great language.  (I'm too old for that.)  On the other hand, I suspect I 
could expand some version of Lisp to do almost anything that anyone could 
imagine, but I may have to do more of it myself.  (I want to get things done, 
not immerse myself in a programming wonderland where I can get lost in 
theoretical discussions about the best way to program something.)

Comments welcome from everyone!

regards,
Randy Kramer