Re: The real Ruby vs. Python.

On Wednesday 27 October 2004 10:11 am, Abe Vionas_MailingList wrote:
| Ruby, on the other hand, while it has a comprehensive
| offering on the Linux platform, is hamstrung on
| windows by it's lack in im****tant areas. If libraries
| exist, they more often then not are NOT being actively
| maintained (my research last night indicated that by
| and large more Python libraries are continually
| actively maintained). This last point is im****tant
| because at one time or another Ruby has HAD libraries
| to cover any need, but without active maintenance they
| are nearly worthless. I for one will not even look at
| a library that hasn't had a release in 2004.

Ironically that should be a good thing!

It's a poor indicator. A lib may be "relatively perfected" and need not be

changed ever again. People are too caught up on changing things. Get 
something to work well, then start a new project.

But I do hear you --since the above is rarely ever done.

2 cents,
T.