Python 3000 -> No, but there's 'Ruby'

[Derek Moeller]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 07:50:27PM +0000, Aahz Maruch wrote:
> [x-posted to comp.lang.ruby, followups to comp.lang.ruby]
> [posted & e-mailed]
> 
> In article <394BB8DE.AE1D6A7A at webtv.com>, balrog  <balrog at webtv.com> wrote:
> >
> >Half-seriously, Ruby is nicer looking & acting;  it's part Python,
> >part Eiffel / Sather, with the quick & easy string handling of Perl.
> 
> This is mainly addressed to comp.lang.ruby; I'm just including
> comp.lang.python because that's where this started:
> 
> Y'know, those of you in the Ruby world who make a point of going around
> trashing other languages are probably doing more to hurt the acceptance
> of Ruby over the long haul than anything else.  It's *rude*.  I was
> almost interested enough in Ruby at one point to check it out, but I
> have to say that the Attitude I've seen so far is even worse than the
> Perlers.
> 
> It'd be real nice if the level-headed Ruby people restrained the
> hotheads.

We seem to harp on the shortcomings of C, C++, Perl, Ruby, and a few other
languages in c.l.py. Seeing as how this fellow mentioned some things that
he felt he didn't like about Python, and what he did like about Ruby, I can't
see the large difference between that and Pythoners spieling about their
increased productivity compared to C++/C, the hairiness of Perl, whatever Ruby's
got against it, etc.

Or is what we say the truth, and what this man says merely befuddled and perhaps
angered myth? It isn't good to hold double standards.

Now, I can't say I agree with posting that bit about Ruby as a follow-up to
mentioning Python-3k, as this was not what the original poster asked for.

-- 
Derek Moeller

         /"\
         \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
          X      Against HTML Mail
         / \