I can only say that it enhances my virtuous hubris that the mighty CPAN is the standard by which others are measured. CPAN facilitates my laziness and satisfies my impatience with its rich and numerous offerings.
It sounds as if the Ruby folks may one day soon have a similar treasure of their own. May it bring them the joy that CPAN has brought me.
Agreed. Is there really a competition and must they be mutually exclusive? I think that the quality of a code repo is a reflection of the community at large, and if Ruby gets even close to enjoying what Perl has, then that is good for all programmers. On the other hand, CPAN is not why I love Perl, so there is nothing that RubyForge could become that would make me switch.
Fourth, library quality and usefulness (more subjective here). There’s a lot of overlap and, well, cruft on CPAN. There are over 300 Acme (joke) modules.
well, that reminds me of a famous quote of merlyn:
SuperGumby> OH, and reading this group daily (if only it wasn't quite
SuperGumby> PS Why does it appear perl programmers are so damned obses
SuperGumby> oneliners, I'm feeling as if I'm gonna be ostracised for c
SuperGumby> structuring,,, maybe I'll know why in a few months :-)
Because Perl's so durn easy to use we got time to play around impressi
each other. :)
Dont forget that the CPAN librarian (Jarkko) has long encouraged other languages to follow his example. What i found interesting about the article was the user counts. Does RubyForge require users to be registered to download code? If so then it would explain the difference in number of users.
Does RubyForge require users to be registered to download code?
Nope - but there are forums and some other stuff that are better when registered. Really RF is closer to SourceForge than it is to CPAN in many ways, with Gems doing a chunk of the long-list-o-stuff the various interpretations of CPAN do.
Perl has never been the only language with a repository like CPAN; it's probably not even close to the biggest, and it's certainly not the oldest.
Broadly similar repositories exist for every language used for serious work, with different rules for how code gets uploaded and maintained. Examples include netlib, StatCodes, CRAN, and quite a few others. CPAN is not being usurped by RubyForge any more than CRAN is being usurped by CPAN.
Information about American English usage here and here.
Any Northeastern US area jobs? I'm currently unemployed.
In the years to come, I still expect code being pumped into CPAN, as long as there are still people maintain legacy Perl applications, unfortunate for them.
It is totally meaningless to just talk about the numbers. Just pick one example, there are tons of Perl packages around class, but for this same category you only need zero package for Python or Ruby. Another example, there are lots of packages try to wrap SQL, who cares, nobody knows SQL inside-out would appreciate those garbages.
A core philosophy of Perl is that there isn't always just one way to solve a problem. A solution must match the problem and the person solving it. Some problems lend themselves well to a functional approach and if you're MJD, you might well choose a functional solution. But if you've only ever programmed in BASIC, you may well choose a different solution. And that's okay because nobody is expected to know everything.
When viewed in that light, your two examples become "meaningless". There are tons of modules dealing with object oriented stuff on CPAN because different people have different affinities for different object models. Perl doesn't need these modules, but they are there for those who would find them useful. Same for your SQL example. If someone who knows SQL wouldn't appreciate those modules, then consider that they may be for people who don't know SQL as well as an SQL-guru.
Or, put another way, if someone were to write many modules for Ruby that mimic all of the Perl modules you disdain and put them on rubyforge, would that somehow detract from the value of Ruby as a language?
Great! I think we're in agreement here - CPAN rules and it's only going to get better as people contribute (er, "pump in") more code. I don't know what's "unfortunate" about that, but I guess you don't use Perl very often. It's certainly quite fortunate for most Perlmonks users.
But this isn't a horse-race. We all win when more good open-source code is released. I just happen to think CPAN has the greatest collection of it.
Perl's killer feature is Perl. CPAN is a wonderful achievement, but folks have already mentioned that Perl is not the first language to have a library repository.
Rubyforge is an interesting alternative to Sourceforge for projects in the Ruby language. The gems repository is a growing supply of readily accessible libraries. They are not exactly the same thing, even though they are served from the same place. I know a growing number of Ruby developers who use gems regularly but are only vaguely aware of Rubyforge.
Nobody is usurping anything, and I'm not sure if the comparison is valid.
I have become impatient with certain aspects of the Ruby culture over the years. Ruby is a great language and folks are creating all sorts of interesting projects with it, but many users of the language are stuck in this youngest-child sort of "We're worthy! Notice us! Validate us!" frenzy. Not all of them, obviously, but enough that I can't handle reading the ruby-talk postings more often than about once per week. Yes, Ruby is great. Now shut up and get some work done.
When you compare the size of ruby library and perl's, make sure don't compare orange to apple.
Ruby library will be small as expected. For example, Mr. Ovid's framework won't be there, just like Ovid admited, Ruby has no need for that thing.
Actually among those three - perl, python and ruby, python is the best. perl is outdated, but ruby's document is way too poor and unusable.
So far I disliked onething about Python the most, the stupid forced indent, and the fact that the lauguage understand logic around indent. Try to use aneidtor that does not respect tab that well, kills you.