Right, but Ruby has its own baggage of design problems, like the lack of namespaces, which are a core idea in Python. I don't argue that one is better than the other, I just see a lot of similarities.
Sure. Ruby has its warts too. Conceptually I find it cleaner than Python overall but I don't think it's possible to design a useful language without making some mistakes along the way. There seems to be two kinds of programming languages: the beautiful ones nobody uses and the messy ones people use to get things done.
In the 9 years I've been using Ruby, I've not once missed having namespaces. A lack of namespaces is a valid complaint against C and Objective-C, not against Ruby—since you can use either nested modules or classes to achieve a similar effect, and often with better design results.
Comments
Right, but Ruby has its own baggage of design problems, like the lack of namespaces, which are a core idea in Python. I don't argue that one is better than the other, I just see a lot of similarities.
Sure. Ruby has its warts too. Conceptually I find it cleaner than Python overall but I don't think it's possible to design a useful language without making some mistakes along the way. There seems to be two kinds of programming languages: the beautiful ones nobody uses and the messy ones people use to get things done.
In the 9 years I've been using Ruby, I've not once missed having namespaces. A lack of namespaces is a valid complaint against C and Objective-C, not against Ruby—since you can use either nested modules or classes to achieve a similar effect, and often with better design results.