What's TOTALLY COMPELLING about Ruby over Python?

[Jeff Epler]

On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 11:07:56AM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> I'm realizing I didn't frame my question well.
> 
> What's ***TOTALLY COMPELLING*** about Ruby over Python?

Nobody who uses Python would believe that there's anything "totally
compelling" about Ruby.  If there were, then none of the posts in
c.l.python would be by people using Python.  Of course, this doesn't
mean that the newsgroup would be empty.  There would still be "enlarge
the size of your Python"-type spam.  And there might even be the odd
troll who would keep posting shit, trying to get the Python community
riled up.  Of course, without Python users, he wouldn't have much fun,
would he, with nobody stupid enough to stand up to defend Python and
"get trolled".  So even the troll should be glad that there's nothing
"totally compelling" about Ruby over Python.

Jeff
PS I'd just like to state for the record that neither Python nor Ruby
have a totally compelling advantage compared to the following languages:
        BASIC
        /bin/sh
        BrainF**k
        Forth
        IBM 1180 assembler
        K&R C
        LOGO
        make
        Objective COBOL
        Orthagonal*
        RPG/3
        WaX
        WatFiv Fortran
... conversely, in 1985, about half the above did have a compelling
advantage over both Python and Ruby: they existed.
* Of course, I don't think a non-trivial program was ever written in
Orthagonal, despite the fact that it's been around since '92 or '93.