From: Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
Date: 2006-04-21T05:13:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Don't E4X

TRANS wrote:

<snip>

> What do you think? Is E4X important enough to change Ruby?

No. Ruby isn't ECMAScript.  Trying to make it look exactly like ECMAScript 
isn't going to work.  And, frankly, ECMAScript looks to me like nothing more 
than syntactic xpath flavored sugar.  Hardly in the "important" category.

For what it's worth, I think you're on the right track with your own bit of 
syntax near the end of your post.  A sort of DSL, perhaps?

Regards,

Dan