Java is mature. It’s tested. And it’s fast (contrary to what the anti-Java crowd may
still claim). It’s also quite verbose. Going from Java to Ruby, expect your code size
to shrink down considerably. You can also expect it to take less time to knock together
quick prototypes.
As with Java, in Ruby,…
- Memory is managed for you via a garbage collector.
- Objects are strongly typed.
- There are public, private, and protected methods.
- There are embedded doc tools (Ruby’s is called RDoc). The docs generated by rdoc look
very similar to those generated by javadoc.
Unlike Java, in Ruby,…
- You don’t need to compile your code. You just run it directly.
- There are different GUI toolkits. Ruby users can try
WxRuby,
FXRuby,
Ruby-GNOME2,
or the bundled-in Ruby Tk for example. - You use the
end
keyword after defining things like classes, instead of having
to put braces around blocks of code. - You have
require
instead ofimport
. - All member variables are private. From the outside, you access everything via methods.
- Parentheses in method calls are usually optional and often omitted.
- Everything is an object, including numbers like 2 and 3.14159.
- There’s no static type checking.
- Variable names are just labels. They don’t have a type associated
with them. - There are no type declarations. You just assign to new variable names as-needed
and they just “spring up” (i.e.a = [1,2,3]
rather thanint[] a = {1,2,3};
). - There’s no casting. Just call the methods. Your unit tests should tell you
before you even run the code if you’re going to see an exception. - It’s
foo = Foo.new( "hi")
instead ofFoo foo = new Foo( "hi" )
. - The constructor is always named “initialize” instead of the name of the class.
- You have “mixin’s” instead of interfaces.
- YAML tends to be favored over XML.
- It’s
nil
instead ofnull
. ==
andequals()
are handled differently in Ruby. Use==
when you want to test equivalence in Ruby (equals()
is Java). Useequal?()
when you want to know if two objects are the same (==
in Java).