When comparing Ruby (via Opal) vs PharoJS, the Slant community recommends PharoJS for most people. In the question“What are the best languages that compile to JavaScript? ” PharoJS is ranked 13th while Ruby (via Opal) is ranked 16th. The most important reason people chose PharoJS is:
For people who enjoy programming in Smalltalk, Pharo allows developers to use Smalltalk for web development as well, since it transpiles Smalltalk code to JavaScript.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Elegant syntax
Ruby has a very clean syntax that makes code easier to both read and write than more traditional Object Oriented languages, such as Java. For beginning programmers, this means the focus is on the meaning of the program, where it should be, rather than trying to figure out the meaning of obscure characters.
presidents = ["Ford", "Carter", "Reagan", "Bush1", "Clinton", "Bush2"]
for ss in 0...presidents.length
print ss, ": ", presidents[presidents.length - ss - 1], "\n";
end
Pro Popular
Ruby is one of the most popular languages for developing web sites. As a result, there's an abundant amount of documentation, sample code, and libraries available for learning the language and getting your project up and running. The most popular features are just 'gem install' away.
Pro Program the web in Smalltalk
For people who enjoy programming in Smalltalk, Pharo allows developers to use Smalltalk for web development as well, since it transpiles Smalltalk code to JavaScript.
Pro Support for Phonegap to go directly to iOS/Android mobile App
Pro Compiles to very efficient Javascript, with almost perfect Smalltalk semantics
Pro Great IDE support
Pro Seamless integration with JavaScript libraries
Can directly call to / be called from JavaScript and can use foreign JavaScript objects.
Will soon have ability to generate and use AMD modules.
Cons
Con Meta-programming causes confusion for new developers
The ability for libraries to open classes and augment them leads to confusion for new developers since it is not clear who injected the functionality into some standard class.
In other words, if two modules decide to modify the same function on the same class can introduce a number of issues. Mainly, the order in which the modules are included matters. Since you more or less can't tell what kind of "helper" functions a module might write into any class, or for that matter, where the helper function was included from, you may sometimes wonder why class X can do Y sometimes but not at other times.