From: why the lucky stiff <ruby-talk@...>
Date: 2005-02-14T15:56:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Printing why's (poignant) guide to ruby

Shalev NessAiver wrote:

> I agree. I've just started teaching someone C++ and he had no problem 
> with \n. This is the first time he's ever looked at a language but, 
> even so, it's not like he's a dumb person. Often times it seems we 
> (programmers) underestimate the ability of non-programmers to learn 
> programming.

People know and recognize "http://".  Which is more cryptic than most 
Ruby code.

People can visually parse "martha.bremforth@incrediblepeople.com".  
Which is more cryptic than most Ruby code.

And these same people, the ones who we shield from programming, can 
easily learn to decrypt this bit of chaos:

  <font color="RED"><b>I'm a new person</b> since I lost 25 lbs &amp; 14 
ounces on Kelly's <i>Planned Nutrition Program</i></font>

Best of all, these people will know the context.  Many will know what 
this is and how to retrace their steps to getting it using a search engine.

The only reason these people don't know Ruby is because they just happen 
to not know Ruby.  Not because they're dumb.  Not because they have no 
use for it.  Simply because they're unlucky.  (Assuming Ruby is a lucky 
strike, which I wholeheartedly believe it is.)

Beaver tales, as always,

_why