Lisp's Influence on Ruby
124 points by tacoda 4 days ago | 12 comments

danlitt 23 minutes ago
> He’s described Ruby’s design as starting from a simple Lisp, stripping out macros and s-expressions

Put the macros back! It would be so cool!

reply
pjmlp 2 hours ago
That is actually Lisp influence on Smalltalk, and Perl, that eventually influenced Ruby.
reply
0xpgm 2 hours ago
From the article

> Matz has said as much. He’s described Ruby’s design as starting from a simple Lisp, stripping out macros and s-expressions, then adding an object system, blocks, and Smalltalk-style methods. The features most Rubyists fall in love with aren’t the object-oriented ones. They’re the functional ones, dressed in friendlier clothes.

reply
wglb 51 minutes ago
But macros and s-expressions are two of my favorites parts of lisp!
reply
dismalaf 46 minutes ago
Funny enough Lisp was originally meant to be written in a higher level syntax (with infix operators and everything).

But yeah, macros and S-expressions make it easier to write your own DSLs.

reply
Smalltalker-80 2 hours ago
Totalle agree, I just googled it: "Yukihiro 'Matz' Matsumoto heavily credits Smalltalk as the deepest structural inspiration behind Ruby’s object model. He combined Smalltalk’s beautiful object-oriented architecture and message-passing system with features from other languages to create a tool designed primarily for developer happiness." Including the closures and collection operations.
reply
riffraff 20 minutes ago
"Some may say Ruby is a bad rip-off of Lisp or Smalltalk, and I admit that. But it is nicer to ordinary people."

(Matz speaking at the LL2 conference some 20+ years ago)

reply
dragonwriter 2 hours ago
No, its actual influence from Lisp-family languages (including Scheme). Yes, Lisp also influenced Perl and Smalltalk, but Matz was not ignorant of Lisp with the only influence om Ruby from Lisp being indirect through those other languages.
reply
dismalaf 27 minutes ago
I love Ruby, use it for most of my projects that don't require performance.

Nothing I would love more than a Ruby with a Common-Lisp like compiler and runtime. Unboxed types, native compilation, partial compilation, live image (Ruby has this but "faster Rubies" like Crystal don't), etc...

reply
rjsw 21 minutes ago
... or just use Common Lisp.
reply
dismalaf 14 minutes ago
Which is what I do. One can dream though right? Of a world where Ruby stayed just a tad more Lisp-y and less Perl/C/Smalltalk/Unix-y.

Also I'm working on a DSL/Macros that give me more Ruby-esque quality of life things in Lisp.

reply
DonHopkins 48 minutes ago
What have the Lisps ever done for us?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7HmhrgTuQ

reply
tug2024 2 hours ago
[dead]
reply