Ruby website redesigned (opens in new tab)

That said, it's cool seeing some of those samples, because they're honestly not really what I expected. For example, I didn't expect the list subtraction to work at a set operation, so seeing that example gives me a feel for what sort of things I can do with Ruby code.

Low bandwidth, minimal in an artistic way.

I wish less sites would try to make them look like a wordpress from the early twenty aughts.

Speaking from experience (recently we rebuilt https://raku.org), I am sure that they will come back and optimize, but tbh this is not the priority with a new site where the hits will top out at ~ 10k / hour.

I am no great fan of animations, simpler is better imho - and I have resisted requests to add a sandbox to the Raku site since https://glot.io/new/raku does such a good job anyway... but I think Ruby is likely to appeal to a wider audience via a cool design vibe, whereas Raku is still in the early adopter / geek phase of adoption.

btw Ruby is a fantastic language!

It is part of what distinguishes actually good web devs from move fast and break everything kind of people.

care to elaborate?

Amateur hour.

For reference this is the old one, which is much better: https://www.ruby-lang.org/images/about/screenshot-ruby-lang-... From: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/about/website/

The old one was better because it said something about what the language is and how it benefits the user. "Best friend" is not descriptive. "dynamic language with minimal syntax that is easy to read and write" at least tells me something about Ruby, its priorities, and value proposition. I'm very concerned about a language that claims it wants to be my friend.

The homepage loads 9.7kB of JS. Navigating to every single link in the main nav results in no additional JS being loaded.

The site is fine.

Ex 1

    let say = "I love OCaml"
    let () = print_endline say

    (* Requires linking in the 'str' library *)
    let say = Str.replace_first (Str.regexp {|\(.*\)love\(.*\)|}) {|\1*love*\2|} say;;
    let () = print_endline (String.uppercase_ascii say)

    let () = ignore |> Seq.init 5 |> Seq.iter (fun () -> print_endline say)

    module StringSet = Set.Make(String)

    let cities = StringSet.of_list [
      "London";
      "Oslo";
      "Paris";
      "Amsterdam";
      "Berlin";
    ]
    let visited = StringSet.of_list ["Berlin"; "Oslo"]

    (* Requires the 'fmt' library *)
    let string_set fmt v = Fmt.Dump.list Fmt.string fmt (StringSet.to_list v)

    let () =
      Format.printf "I still need to visit the following cities: %a\n"
        string_set
        (StringSet.diff cities visited)

  module Greeter : sig
    type t

    val make : string -> t
    val salute : t -> unit
  end = struct
    type t = { name : string }

    let make name = { name = String.uppercase_ascii name }
    let salute t = Format.printf "Hello %s\n" t.name
  end

  let g = Greeter.make "world"
  let () = Greeter.salute g

It does reflect what the language creators pay attention to. Way back when, when I was undecided between learning Python or Ruby, after visiting countless resources I noticed Ruby websites in general looked way nicer and clearer than Python websites, so I picked Ruby. Now, years of experience with both languages later, I have zero doubt that to me that was the right choice at the time. I would’ve been frustrated with Python to no end.

I no longer need either language regularly, but given the choice again I would not hesitate to go for Ruby.

All that said, I do agree with some other comments on the thread regarding the disappointing reliance on JavaScript here. Should just be static.

Sometimes it's nice to just let people rest and get on with life.

Unfortunately, most people today probably don't care about what you're talking about. (I do, but I've decided not to comment on it anymore, because it would probably drive me crazy :)

This is bit too much to ask. Just check the source it is swollen with Tailwind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_enhancement

There were a lot of practical reasons for that: The browser landscape was much more diverse, different browsers had different support of standard Javascript, some browsers didn't even support JS and some people still kept text-only browsers like lynx/links in mind. Also browsers were not evergreen, so a large part of the audience could be on some older versions. Another thing were sometimes brittle network connection, especially over mobile. Depending on JS could in the case of corruption mean non-functioning websites.

For a lot whose exposure to web development and the discussions abound that, that reason will be stuck in their head, even if in the last decade of React ets the "best practices" will have changed.

There is also an aesthetic thing: There is a thing of beauty in simply curling an url and piping it into grep or such to get the thing you need, instead of having so have an headless browser. In my mind that is still how the web should work.

> Why the target audience of the ruby, probably primary web developers, whould do that?

In my experience, it's mostly web developers who care about this in the first place.

Seems like a more grounded and healthier approach to programming languages.

Python is pretty well known as a data, analytic and machine learning oriented language, and they lean into a more broad characterization.

Perl might be described as dead/dying, and they characterize its development as ongoing.

PHP might be described as a web scripting language, and they characterize it as general purpose and broad.

Swift might be described as an Apple platform a language, and they really want us to know its multi-platform.