Hopefully, the author changed the article’s name. Yes, Rails is Ruby. A Ruby with a superset of capabilities. This feature is at the heart of Ruby itself.
I’m ok with this, even after a fight on a general library we developed originally outside of Rails, but have a subtle change when used inside Rails. This caused a break on our promise but we found how to deal with (related to JSON processing).
There is room to learn. Ruby can’t be compared with other technologies. We have to make effort to understand its shape and use its strength.
This is also the reason I always call a Ruby on Rails developer a Ruby on Rails developer, and never a Ruby developer until a real project was achieved outside of Rails.
I always called myself a Rails user because Rails always felt like a really really good CMS… because it is just so easy to use but also because knowing the guts of Rails at an intimate level (and what I would call a Rails developer) isn’t really necessary in order to use it (which is both a blessing and a curse of course).
I think this led to frameworks like Phoenix not wanting to use so much magic (and something that made them appealing to many people).
Yeah, I also have no idea why.
My first thought was that because ruby was designed as kind of a perl replacement, but I just googled it and it looks like perl has proper imports/exports
but also because knowing the guts of Rails at an intimate level (and what I would call a Rails developer) isn’t really necessary in order to use it (which is both a blessing and a curse of course).