[ruby-talk:00544] Re: A new discussion topic ;-)

On Mon, 02 Aug 1999, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In message "[ruby-talk:00539] A new discussion topic ;-)"
>    on 99/08/01, Clemens Hintze <[e-mail]> writes:
>

[...]

>I like your idea to make a new language with Ruby's syntax (and
>concept).  Designing a language really is fun.  Why don't you join the
>game, Clemens? :-)

Do you say that to indicate, that I have too much changing proposals?
;-)

I have already played with that thoughts before I have met Ruby :-)
That was, because I was (how to say?) somewhat unconvinced about
Python. But I am glad, that I have not begun yet!

You know, I am still searching for the perfect language yet? I don't
know, what it will look like. But I guess, it will be VERY near to
Ruby. Ruby has the most (if not all) advantages of Smalltalk, the
expressiveness and speed of Perl. And I really LOVE the manner, how to
use the extension API!!! :-)))))

My perfect language should have easy concepts and should be very
flexible. Smalltalk and Forth comes into my mind. But I do not
very like all of the syntax of Self and Smalltalk (I also don't like
the my-image-is-your-program-paradigm), and Forth is too low level
for my needs.

If I would design a a language today, it would be very similar with
Ruby. So similar, that I feel it would not makes sense to begin with
it!

So I try the other way around. I will try, whether it is possible to
bring all the things I miss, into Ruby. I think, that would perhaps
makes more sense, than to create an offspring!

Furthermore, during discussion I can perhaps find out, whether my
ideas make sense or not :-)

>
>OK, let's name it `Serf'.  You know it's hard to tell Ls and Rs for us
>Japanese.   Also, `r' can mean it inherited some attributes from Ruby.
># footnote: it's joke, of cource.  you can name it by yourself.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

>
>Anyway, class-less OOPing is interesting.  I knew Self and its
>class-less programming before I designed Ruby.  Concept of singleton
>methods inherited from it.  But, class concept is useful for example,
>to organize library.  So I didn't abandon the classes in Ruby.

Hmmm! But what can you do with classes, that you cannot do with the
prototype paradigm of Self?

>
>In addition, `^' prefix notation is pretty interesting, too.

I have tried to build it in into the Ruby interpreter to play a
little bit with that syntax. But I must say, that I have not much
experience yet. It didn't work at all :-}

>
>                                                matz.

Please going on to be patient with my ideas :-)

\cle