OO in Java compared to OO in Ruby, RoR

[Sree Va]

While Java is still evolving and going Open Source, too;
Why bring another OO language into this world?
Why not put all that effort to make Ruby, RoR, into Open Source Java and make it more RICH?
For example, what difference would it make searching on yahoo or on google, you still get ennumerous results to 'pick', still?

[Justin Gehtland]

I'd say the biggest barricade to pouring that effort into Java is the glacial pace of change of Java, due to the processes surrounding modifications to the core language and libraries. Which isn't to say it won't change, or good work isn't being done. Far from it. But for speed of change, a smaller, totally open source project is going to win every time.

What I find so appealing is that the Java community is rallying and finding out how to adopt many of the features of Ruby and Rails that make it compelling. JRuby, SEAM, Sails, Tapestry, and many other projects are racing to learn the lessons and take what can be taken.

[Sree Va]

Oops! My bad. I shouldn't have compared Java with Ruby, in the first place.



http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/
The Ideals of Ruby�s Creator

Ruby is a language of careful balance. Its creator, Yukihiro �matz� Matsumoto, blended parts of his favorite languages (Perl, Smalltalk, Eiffel, Ada, and Lisp) to form a new language that balanced functional programming with imperative programming.

He has often said that he is �trying to make Ruby natural, not simple,� in a way that mirrors life.

Building on this, he adds:

Ruby is simple in appearance, but is very complex inside, just like our human body1.

[Guy Allard]

Just for general information: when matz came out with Ruby, Java did not exist and would not for about another 3 years.

Guy
[ January 30, 2007: Message edited by: Guy Allard ]