Dear Matz,

I just stumbled on this really great quote[1] and was inspired to
write this.

> [Q: why does Ruby have callcc?]
>
> The official answer is "why not".  I provide the features, you use
> them.
>                                                      matz.

For the last few years, it seems like Ruby has been invaded by
minimalists.  I'm using that in a relative sense, and a good-natured
ribbing sense even, this is Ruby after all.

There are many existing languages designed to be easy to implement.

There are many existing languages designed to be easy to optimize.

There are many existing languages designed to be "safe".

There are (many?) existing languages designed to have only one way to
do it.  The most popular one is in almost all respects on par with
Ruby.

Ruby is not one of many.  Ruby is special.  Another quote[2].

> I also wanted Ruby to be natural to use, and I wanted programmers to
> feel  at ease  when  coding  in it  so  they can  enjoy  the act  of
> programming itself.  To me,  this is the  ultimate goal  of language
> design. I have  to admit, I don't believe I  can satisfy everyone --
> every  programmer has  different needs.  But I  still believe  I can
> satisfy many, including myself.

There are very few languages designed to be enjoyable.

As one of the satisfied many, I felt compelled to provide a
counterpoint to the general sort of pushback against new features,
experimental spirit and, well, fun.

We're out here, even if our quiet sighs of satisfaction cannot be
heard.  We don't care if you don't have a use-case for every new idea.
We trust your instincts, so should you.  You have to take big steps
sometimes if only to not get stuck in a local optimum.

Please make Ruby as big, rich, and beautiful as you believe it needs
to be.

Steve

[1] http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/78190
[2] http://www.ddj.com/web-development/184404436?pgno=11