Ruby: first impressions

So I’ve been trying Ruby recently, partially trying to add some substance to my CV, and partially out of curiosity. I used to be a complete python snob; I didn’t understand why anyone wouldn’t use python. It is a dynamic language so no more manual memory management (though there are plenty of advantages cough cough); duck typing deserves its own special place in hell but it is bloody convenient; the amazing standard library which is great for system administration; and many other things.

I use python in my day job1 and was perfectly happy with it. As I came from a C++ background I agreed with the “explicit is better than implicit” philosophy, I understood the power of decorators and context managers - I still had yet to master metaclasses but that’s another story.

I was amazed with some of the metaprogramming that was possible with python, like the list comprehension, or the memory saving generators, it makes working with scientific data a breeze with numpy snd matplotlib, and the significant whitespace really works well: you are all indenting your code properly aren’t you?

I heard that Ruby has some amazing metaprogramming ability, but I didn’t realise until I tried that you can add functionality to an existing class by just redefining it! Even core classes like numbers.

Rails does this exclusively creating such lines as


by adding functionality to the Fixnum class, for example:

class Fixnum
  def foo
    "Hello world"

# => "Hello world"


So the metaprogramming outlined above is great, and extremely powerful. I was worried initially about this and how it may cause confusion. Function overloading in C++ is already bad enough as you have to dive into the documentation for the simplest methods. In ruby the possibility for this is even worse! But it seems the common libraries are trustworthy in this respect and do not abuse this functionality. Beginners warning: do not abuse this feature!

Another amazing feature is method_missing where if a method is not recognised (Ruby uses the message sending style where you could send any method to any object, it just may not do anything - and will probably throw an exception) this method - if defined - is called.

class TestClass
  def method_missing(*args, &block)
    puts "Message '#{args.shift}' called with arguments: #{args}"
end, 'stuff')
# => Message 'bad_method' called with arguments: [100, "stuff"]


In Python context managers were added in 2.6 to perform code before and after the block, such as automatically closing files (note: the contextlib library is brilliant for this, creating one manually is a lot of boilerplate)

from contextlib import contextmanager

def to_stuff():
    print 'Before'
    yield 10
    print 'After'

with to_stuff() as value:
    print value == 10

# Prints:
# Before 
# True
# After

Ruby takes this to the next level with blocks. The syntax looks similar but it’s baked into the language:

def to_stuff
  puts 'Before'
  yield 10
  puts 'After'

to_stuff do |value|
  puts value == 10

# Prints:
# Before 
# True
# After

You see these blocks everywhere! This context has great power, a new object when generated can be passed into a block for more syntactically nice setup |o|
  o.value = 10


Against Python’s “explicit is better than implicit” philosophy, Ruby seems to have the opposite. I don’t know if this is completely true but that’s how it seems. For example class methods can be treated as if they were local variables, and parentheses are (mostly) optional, the last statement of any block is returned, and other things. For example

class TestClass
  def foo

  def print_value(value)
    puts value

  def print_foo
    value = 100
    puts foo        # Is foo a variable or a method?!

    print_value 150 # No parentheses!


Generating DSLs

Due to the free syntax of Ruby, especially the lack of parentheses, a custom DSL (domain specific language, essentially a mini programming language for a very specific task) is easy to create in Ruby. Consequently to a beginner it’s easy to read Ruby code written like this and believe it is a different language.

For example a sort-of Makefile alternative rake can look like

desc "This is a simple task. You can run it with `rake foo`"
task :foo do
  Dir["*"].each do |f|
    puts f

whereas the testing framework rspec can look like

describe FooModel do
  before(:each) do
    puts 'Before'

  it "should have some specified behaviour" do
    expect(FooModel).to not_be(nil)

or even

print_stuff "foo"
change_directory "/tmp"
add_file "test"

These would all be valid ruby and generally apart from the odd keyword (do/end etc.) they can have a completely different style. This makes each implementation fresh and different and exciting, providing a lot of power to the language.


Now we get on to the poster child of Ruby: Rails. Who can mention Ruby without talking about rails eh?

Well it’s a great thing to have for a language. Can you name a defining Python library? Django? Numpy? Twisted? In some sense Python is a little too good at everything which makes it not excel as much as Rails. A lot of the things outlined above are prevalent in Rails, and make the framework a dream to work with. Ok so a dream for me, perhaps I’m just naive and haven’t worked day to day in it, but I’d definitley like to try!

In all Ruby is worth learning, system administrators are using it for tasks, or one can use it as a Makefile replacement and Rails’ emphasis on convention makes it a lot to learn initially but once you have a basic knowledge it’s not too difficult to pick up. I’ve outlined some of the resources I used to learn below for more information. I hope to learn more of what Ruby has to offer in the future, and possibly to pass on my knowledge to the next generation.


### Beginner

Rails for Zombies

### Technical




(I’ll try and keep these updated)

  1. “job” ↩︎