The programming language, that is. Not the TV show. I learned that back in high school. Had many of the sketches memorized.
Anyway: What with a notable lack of Ruby bindings for Qt5 (which has a nice set of features lacking in Qt4, some of which would be useful for stuff I want to do), I'm sort of casting about. One option might be to figure out why qtbindings doesn't build for Qt5 (its build script refuses to so its thing; I assume there's some actual reason for this), and fix it myself.
For much of the kind of stuff I'm doing, the rest of the world seems to have gone to Python the past few years (and I seem to be the only one who's ever used Ruby for this).
I actually have a copy of Programming Python: a first edition, in excellent condition, if there are any collectors out there. Presumably I should consult something a few years newer.
If memory serves, I bought the book because some program I was using had gone unsupported, and it was written in Python. I think it was Sketch (later reborn as Skencil, but still not available on the current version of Debian, and I still have some old artwork in that format, in need of translating to Inkscape or some such).
I looked at it, and tried to grok, but just didn't (at the time) get along with the syntax.
Maybe I should look at it again.
I keep having the urge to create a new programming language. Did that back in college... was called GSPL, and it compiled to 6809 code. The compiler was originally in SCUD UCSD Pascal, but then I translated it, and built a native version. (Actually, there were two native versions; the one used to build the compiler truncated symbols at, IIRC, six characters, because otherwise it would run out of memory on a machine with only 56K of RAM.) I (or, rather, my publisher) sold something like two or three copies; some time later, I actually met one of the users, who'd been developing control firmware for some heavy machinery.
I actually have two, quite different but possibly reconcilable, visions. Both have basically C-ish syntax. One is scripting-oriented, and has a more or less Ruby-like (not C++-like, and don't even get me started on Objective C) object system. The other has upgraded declarations allowing detailed physical record layouts, such that one might declare, say, the structure of a IPv4 header and than just access the fields as normal structure elements, with alignment and endianness taken care of by the compiler.
Last time I took on something like that, it was a C compiler, with some neat language extensions I happened to want (plus 68000 assembler, plus universal linker) from scratch (well, I did have a C compiler, for another architecture, to compile it with). It took a good chunk of a summer, and I was a lot younger then, and better able to handle the required amounts of Jolt Cola. Now... well, there are a couple of open-source back-ends out there (gcc, llvm), which would remove much (not by any means all) of the code-generation effort, so it's a smaller project, but still a bit much to take on for a lark.