From: Jared Nuzzolillo <onceuponapriori@...>
Date: 2005-08-17T01:31:56+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby for my new business?

------=_Part_1495_14189477.1124209913069
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Brock,

Bear in mind that my viewpoints have evolved since I crafted my list. At th=
e=20
time, I associated a languages flexibility with it's inheritance model: i.e=
.,=20
languages with prototype-based inheritance always seemed far more flexible=
=20
to me. Ruby has since proved that class-based languages can be just as=20
flexible and expressive as prototype-based languages, but I still feel that=
=20
prototype-based languages have a certain conceptual elegance that is lackin=
g=20
in class-based alternatives. The other issues are really minor, but to put=
=20
them briefly: 1) I really miss the object literal syntax from javascript 2)=
=20
I love the way Io ( http://www.iolanguage.com/ ) allows you to grab a hold=
=20
of the message tree and modify, remove or defer nodes of it at will 3) I=20
love the transparent futures of Io...=20

Mind you, I've considered switching to Io, but I haven't used it enough to=
=20
really know whether the differences would make it worthwhile. Somehow, I=20
doubt it; there is just too much to love about Ruby, including this amazing=
=20
community.

Thanks,
Jared

On 8/16/05, Brock Weaver <brockweaver@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> We need more people like you Jared! Asking fellow developers what
> their thoughts are, basing business decisions off of their responses.
> Glad to see that actually happens in some companies.
>=20
> I would gladly be a remote ruby developer for you -- there's not much
> else to do in Iowa anyway. :)
>=20
> Just out of curiosity, what is the one or two that Matz missed out of the=
=20
> ten?
>

------=_Part_1495_14189477.1124209913069--