you're right of course. I thought I'd include it though since its so popular.

> Ruby on Rails is not a unique programming language. Matz created Ruby.

What does "not a unique programming language" mean? Perhaps 'discrete' or 'distinct' in place of 'unique'? As not an RoR developer, I'm hardly in a position to say, but surely at a certain point a DSL deserves to be called a language in its own right. (Extreme case (that, I realise, is far past what anyone would call a DSL): Perl, as with many other languages, is written in C, but certainly counts as a separate programming language.)

EDIT, in response to two downvotes: surely it's a legitimate question? I genuinely don't know what it means to say that something isn't unique (except mathematically, that it means that there's more than one of it). Assuming that it means what it seems to mean, how does one draw the line that I mentioned?

Rails is not a porgramming language, for various pedantic reasons. That doesn't make your idea bad. Rails is a defined pattern of expressing a program, conceptually similar to a language. You could call it a dialect.

Rail[1] is a programming language, but that is orthogonal to your point.

[1] - http://esolangs.org/wiki/Rail

Rails isn't a programming language at all, so it can't really be a "unique" one.

Ruby on Rails is one of many frameworks on top of the Ruby language.

The grandparent was right, in a sense, because while Rails definitely is not a standalone language on its own, it is an embedded DSL since you are working at a much higher level of abstraction than what Ruby offers out-of-the-box.

You could say the same about Ruby and C.

>Ruby is a DSL for C since you are working at a much higher level of abstraction than what C offers out of the box.

I don't think that's how it works. Ruby is general-purpose, unlike Rails, which solves a very specific problem by building on top of core Ruby.