Comments for Rudimentary Art of Programming & Development

Comment on Nose: TDD in Python by Jordan

Jordan — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:23:49 +0000

Except that you don’t create the function and then immediately implement the test, it’s the other way around: You write the test FIRST, obviously failing, and then add just enough code to make it pass.

Comment on Unfuddle: Hosted SVN and Git Solution, Redmine, and Trac by Jerome

Jerome — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:02:43 +0000

I think perfect solution for you would be PMP HQ http://www.pmphq.com

Comment on Battle against LAMP (2): LAMP stack is… by didip

didip — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 01:18:23 +0000

LOL. I didn’t exactly remember what article told me to set that one up. But I’m glad that it helped you.

Comment on Battle against LAMP (2): LAMP stack is… by Steph

Steph — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 05:30:34 +0000

THANK YOU!!!

I just spent 2-3 hours trying to figure out what I was doing wrong. Finally I came across your post. “AcceptMutex flock” resolved the issue in a minute. I can’t imagine how much longer it would have taken me to figure it out. Of course it’s only on the Mac OS!

How did you ever figure that one out?

Comment on Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth by roger

roger — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:11:41 +0000

Ruby block performance is pretty good as long as you don’t use named blocks.

no block, no nothing

>> def go; end
>> Benchmark.realtime { 1000000.times{ go() } }
=> 0.265625

with block

>> def go; yield; end
>> Benchmark.realtime { 1000000.times{ go {} } }
=> 0.625

with named block
>> def go █ yield; end
>> Benchmark.realtime { 1000000.times{ go {} } }
=> 6.75

That’s on 1.8 anyway. So Ruby’s anonymous blocks are cheaper than named blocks (NB: named blocks are equal in cost to procs or lambdas).

For me the big difference is still that python 2.5 is faster than ruby 1.9, not to mention more libraries.

Back to my ruby programming since it’s addictive

-r

Comment on Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth by roger

roger — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:05:18 +0000

I am not fully aware of what generator expressions are, but Ruby does a few generator-like things:

http://wiki.github.com/rogerdpack/ruby_code_tutorials/enumerator

http://pragdave.blogs.pragprog.com/pragdave/2007/12/pipelines-using.html

And in 1.9 you can get them by default by not passing a block to iterator methods, like

File.read_lines.each_with_index{|line, index|}

Comment on Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth by roger

roger — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:56:44 +0000

I agree with you, though the rails guides recently published are actually pretty nice, too. Actually makes rails friendly

Comment on Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth by roger

roger — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:55:56 +0000

Ruby has EventMachine and fibers (1.9) and Rack, which are actually pretty nice.
-r

Comment on Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth by The Rubyist: August 2009 Edition

The Rubyist: August 2009 Edition — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 01:09:35 +0000

[...] Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth [...]

Comment on Python vs Ruby, slightly more in-depth by WalterCool

WalterCool — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:57:54 +0000

Using files with python is not hardly… come on!

a = open(‘file’, ‘ro’) #or ‘rw’ or whenever…
a.seek(x) #Point to x line
a.readline() #Read current line and go to next line.

Too hard? Easiest than java!