Are you talking about Ruby-On-Rails, which is a framework, or about Ruby?
Well, to point out my view, I have to admit that PHP is not really good
written. In some functions the needle is the first argument, second the
haystack and vise-versa in other functions.
And talk about OOP with PHP, well, it is -working- but not as like as you know
from Java. In Java I can create a type-hinted hash-map in one line, by the
type-hint is an interface. Very nice and small code. :)
Ruby might also be able to do this. In PHP I have to write a class which does
this for me.
Well, what I want to say is that you cannot compare PHP with wether RoR nor
Java. RoR is a framework, PHP is not. Java is 99.99% pure OO, PHP is not.
Hope that gives you an idea. :)
And btw: Hello. I'm new to this list. ;-)
Roland
On Thursday, 13. March 2008, Greg Donald wrote:
On 3/13/08, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So... there we have it everyone... Greg has admitted that Ruby is as
smart as a cat.
Hahaha.. yeah, you really got me on that one.
/me slaps his knee.
I like something a little more edgy personally. Something closer to
human... something with personality, something that evolves, something
not afraid to be itself. PHP fits the bill.
PHP is anything but itself. Before it was actually written in C it
was first written in Perl. And although it may be written in C and
may look like C and Perl right now, it's clearly evolving into
something very similar to Java. PHP has a long, long history with
identity crisis, ongoing even today.
Meanwhile Ruby was written as a full-on OO language from the start.
The OO layer didn't get strapped on at version 3 like with PHP. OO
was the main idea from the very start with Ruby. As a result Ruby's
OO model makes PHP's OO model look like a steaming pile of shit out in
the pasture. Hell, Perl's OO even makes PHP's OO look bad
syntax-wise.
--
Greg Donald
http://destiney.com/
--
Weblog:
http://blog.mxchange.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
