From: Shashank Date Date: 2002-08-19T05:44:15+09:00 Subject: Re: What Ruby needs. I do not have any problem with item 1) on your wish list as long as I don't loose the dynamic nature of Ruby. But with 2) I am afraid, I have to disagree. For me the "Ruby attraction" is stronger * because of * (and not inspite of ) its independence from the image/core. Again, that is just me ! Wonder what other *** infuential **** Rubyists think ... -- Shanko "Thaddeus L. Olczyk" wrote in message news:3d61fe91.348210671@nntp.interaccess.com... > I use Ruby quite often for scripting and what use it more often for > general stuff except that it has two things missing: > > 1) A compiler. Something that takes Ruby code down to as fast as it > can go ( something like the compilers that come with some Lisps > and with OCaml). > 2) An image/core like Smalltalk and Lisp where I can define things > then save core and pick up where I left off later.