Comparison between Python and "Ruby"

[Ian Clarke]

Disclaimer out of the way, I was recently web surfing when I discovered
a link to a language called "Ruby" which seems to be similar to Python
in that it is a scripting language, and has good support for OO.  Ruby's
home on the web is at http://www.ruby-lang.org/.

The makers of the language have even done a comparison with Python.  In
it they make the following claims (the strange grammar is their's, not
mine):

Problems with Python are:

* incomplete OOP 
* Some data (numerical, list, dictionary, string, etc.) are not
genuine   
  object. 
* Extension modules in C don't realize genuine objects. 
* Tiresome self. are required when each access to instance variable 
* Functions are first class object (Of cource, we know it is not
weak)    
 del, len, etc. are not Object-Oriented. (There are __len__, etc. but
...) 
* Ugly method calling for superclass 
* No class method (module functions alternate it) 
* No way to automatically convert between long integer and small
integer. 
* Because there is no genuine GC, memory leak occur often 
* Writing extension modules is bothersome (some betterments in 1.5) 
* Tuple and list has overlap functionally (not serious) 
* Function objects are accepted as arguments, but iterators are more
elegant. 
* After all, declarations are featured (global) 
* Slower than Ruby (may be improved?) 

I am still trying to download a copy of Ruby to look at it myself,
however do people think these comments are justified?

Ian.

--
Ian Clarke                        Email: I.Clarke at strs.co.uk
Homepage: http://www.gnu.demon.co.uk/
Also see: http://freenet.on.openprojects.net/
"All we see and all we seem is but a dream within a dream"