Re: RDF.ex

> Where it is mostly lacking is in support for robust persistent
repositories, where it relies on gems to bridge to external repos.

Could you expand on this Gregg?

2017-07-01 20:00 GMT+01:00 Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>:

> On Jul 1, 2017, at 11:09 AM, Marcel Otto <marcelotto.de@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Regarding the syntax and the capabilities for DSLs I also agree, but I
> wouldn’t consider these benefits a substantial technical advantage, which
> would justify redoing the enormous amount of work done in the Python world
> in these fields. What would companies or academic institutions who have
> invested in these tools get above some nicer syntax?
>
> Essentially there is only a difference in the underlying philosophies of
> the languages. Although Rubys philosophy also speaks much more to me too, I
> could also imagine that Python's philosophy (<https://www.python.org/dev/
> peps/pep-0020/>) speaks more to the scientists active in the fields in
> question, to many of whom the language is nothing more than a necessary
> tool, which should get out of their way. So they use what they are trained
> in and believe most of their peers want to use.
>
> There will always be passionate developers, who care about the language so
> much, that they better invest time in reimplementing these tools in the
> language of their choice in their free time, but IMO this won't be enough,
> to catch up with the actual drivers in these fields, which are companies
> and academia.
>
> But let me be clear: I would also be happy if more tools in these fields
> were available in Ruby than Python, but I don’t believe that this will
> happen realistically. Although I now would prefer Elixir and would argue,
> that it indeed would have real technical advantages to offer, I am even
> doubtful for Elixir.
>
>
> IMHO, the Ruby RDF eco-system [1] is actually pretty robust, including
> basic RDF concepts, serializers and deserializers, SPARQL, ShEx, reasoning,
> Rails tie-ins and a fair amount more. Where it is mostly lacking is in
> support for robust persistent repositories, where it relies on gems to
> bridge to external repos. Of course, there’s always room for improvement,
> and I, for one, would be interested to hear about missing facilities that
> would make it that much better.
>
> Regarding, Elixir, I think it’s great that this exists; Ruby will never be
> as performant as most other systems, but following the Rails philosophy,
> it’s usually good enough to get quite a bit of interesting things done. In
> the future, I’d like to see more bridges from Ruby to higher-performing
> libraries; if a good Elixir bridge emerges, that might be interesting to
> try to exploit, particularly given that the concepts align well. The Helix
> project [2] is making inroads for accelerating core methods in Rust.
>
> Gregg
>
> [1] https://github.com/ruby-rdf
> [2] https://github.com/tildeio/helix
>
> Despite all of that, these resources might be of interest for you:
>
> - https://github.com/arbox/data-science-with-ruby
> - https://github.com/arbox/machine-learning-with-ruby
> - https://github.com/arbox/nlp-with-ruby
>
> Regards,
> Marcel
>
> On 1. Jul 2017, at 11:20, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:
>
> On 2017/06/28 06:07, Marcel Otto wrote:
>
> Regarding your question, I'm actually not very qualified to answer that,
> but I don't see how Ruby could catch up with Python's huge development leap
> in these fields. The languages are too similar, that there's no real
> technical benefit Ruby could bring to the table over Python.
>
>
> Ruby has a quite different syntax from Python, much more fluid. When it
> comes to Web applications, DHH very clearly explained that Ruby was
> essential for Rails. If we can leverage things such as DSLs and so on, at
> which Ruby is very good, then it may be possible to get an advantage on
> Python in some of these fields.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
>
>
>


-- 
PhD Candidate
Philosophy / Digital Humanities
University College Cork
Ireland
+353(0)857377737 <+353857377737>
Website <http://leto.electropoiesis.org/propaganda/ecce-homo>