From: William Djaja Tjokroaminata Date: 2002-10-01T11:58:55+09:00 Subject: Re: announce@ == less email (FAQ item?) Hi, Inferring from people's response, I realize that this subject is rather controversial. But if we can think positively just for a moment, all the discussions can also be viewed for the goodness of Ruby itself. I don't think the intention is ever to cannibalize or destroy Ruby at all. It is more to give Ruby some challenges, and if it is viewed that the current Ruby can answer these challenges well, then we just move on. It is good if Ruby stays as the current Ruby. However, language technology also continues to progress. When I first learned Tcl, I was very excited about it. But then I found Perl was easier and more powerful. And then I found Python was easier and as powerful. And then I found that Ruby was more consistent, as easy, and as powerful. Based on my personal experience, some languages got popular and then faded away, while others stay for a long time. Ruby also has two choices: to remain the same or to change with new technologies. I really do hope that the current Ruby will withstand the test of time for many-many years to come, just like the C language. But I also hope that Ruby will not stay the same just for the sake of staticity, but because it can always answer new challenges in its current form. However, when the time does come for a new change (like Perl to Perl 6?), I hope that Ruby will also. That's why probably two groups will be good. comp.lang.ruby discusess on exploring the power of Ruby as it is, while comp.lang.ruby.beyond discusses on possible future paths that may be taken by Ruby. I think the discussions on private variables and method overloading are really appropriate for comp.lang.ruby.beyond. On the other hand, if it turns out that the current Ruby is close to the ultimate language (just like C is probably the "ultimate assembly language"), then the discussions on comp.lang.ruby.beyond will die by themselves... Regards, Bill ============================================================================= Albert Wagner wrote: > "Off Topic" can be very subjective. Personally, I view all this talk of new > languages created by cannibalising/destroying Ruby to be OT. I would prefer > that ruby-talk concentrate on exploring the power of Ruby as it is. Matz is > aware of how he intends to enhance and iron out the wrinkles in Ruby, and > judging from versions 1.x, I am delighted with his vision.