Hacker News Reader

Comment by hacksonx | Hacker News Reader

The intro sold the book to me but I'm a bit reluctant to buy it because of the fact that it uses Ruby. I've just started working with Java (straight from University last year) and I've come to realise that in comparison to other OO languages which have evolved their syntax (C# & Python) Java hasn't. I doubt it'll help me with Java. I've already invested in a few books and test engines, mainly for my Oracle certifications.

View on HN

I took a class with Sandi, where this material was covered. I paired with one developer who did mostly Java and he seemed to get a lot of the class even though he hadn't really programmed in Ruby.

Might be worth reconsidering,FWIW.

I found "Practical Object-Oriented Design in Ruby" to be immensely valuable, even though I don't really use Ruby much. I imagine it's the same for this book.

I can't see how that's a problem. I don't know of a single language that is easier to understand at a glance than ruby.

Unless you're doing configuration, Ruby syntax is as simple as it gets.

The best thing you can do to master the Java-only world is to peek outside of it. (And that is true for almost every X-only world, whatever the X value.)

After touching most mainstream languages, I conclude that many of the languages have different syntax and stuff, but the principles are mostly the same. So without having read this book, if it teaches you OOP via ruby, you should be able to apply it in Java as well, but maybe with different syntax but the outcome would be the same

Hey Hacksonx,

If you're planning a career as Java developer, I highly recommend this book. Sandi is a great writer and Ruby is just a tool to communicate a message. You'll gain a lot of insight about how to write great Java by reading any of her books or articles.

Iunno, what's unique to ruby?

I can only think of module mixins. Everything else (blocks, anonymous functions, syntax sugar) can be roughly approximated (i.e. generics), since I strongly doubt the book would use any of the metaprogramming features.

One objection I can think of is that Ruby is dynamically typed. Something that is elegant in Ruby might be a horror in Java.

Having taken Sandi's in-person course (which sounds like it covers a lot of the same territory as this book), the vast majority of it would be perfectly applicable to Javascript. Ruby lets you get away with some neat tricks, like dynamically loading classes by name to avoid ugly switch statements, or the occasional bit of monkey patching, but it's not the focus at all and it's easy to see how you could accomplish it in a more "traditional" way.

Ruby uses messages for methods, allowing cheap delegation; classes can be extended (monkey patched) after definition.

I doubt Ruby OOP code would avoid using all metaprogramming, at the very least attr_accessor!

To me, metaprogramming means writing new macros/templates, not just using the "standard" ones.

Haven't bought it yet, but Sandi's writing and speaking style is very principles driven.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com