From: William Djaja Tjokroaminata <billtj@...>
Date: 2002-09-06T22:50:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby aesthetics

Hi Matz,

I prefer the minimalist way because it reduces the programmer's mind
burden (less keywords to remember) and it makes codes more consistent.  I
look at C, and it has done well with just "if" without "unless".  In Ruby,
just to make myself familiar and comfortable with the language, everytime
I have negative condition, I also write "unless" instead of "if !".  But
if I had a choice, I will eliminate "unless" and provide only "if".

In Python, when I look at a code, if the beginning of a block is "if", I
know exactly that it is a conditional block; nothing else will give me a
conditional block.  In Ruby, I have to read until the end of the statement
to see if there is some statement modifier there before I know whether the
statement is conditional or not.

When I am referring to "minimalism", I don't mean minimalism in terms of
functionality; I just mean "minimalism" in terms of the non-existency of
"equivalence".  For example, in Ruby a block can be written as
"do...end" or "{...}".  In my personal opinion, Ruby will do just fine
with one of them (probably the "do...end" to be consistent with the rest,
while the "{...}" can be used for some other, different, language
construct).  I think this is one of the frequently asked questions of
newcomers to Ruby, which form is preferred.  We know the answer, and we
know there is a precedence difference.  But to be honest, I never use that
precedence difference for my programming advantage.  I also only use
"&&" and never use "and", just because "&&" has the same precedence as in
the C language.  When I need different precedence, I just use
parentheses.  The danger of using "and" in place of "&&" is that when we
use 2 languages such as Ruby and C, we have to always keep in mind that
Ruby's "and" is not the same as C's (and Ruby's) "&&"; otherwise this may
bite someday.

In a previous response you wrote that you also like Python.  May I know
which features of Python that you like?

Regards,

Bill
===========================================================================
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> Why do you prefer minimalist way?  I prefer flexibility,
> expressiveness, and succinctness to minimalism.  I'm sure you don't
> have any problem with "unless" once you've told.

> 							matz.