From: "Mauricio Fernández" <batsman.geo@...>
Date: 2002-12-08T06:46:52+09:00
Subject: Re: elseif?

On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 03:35:15AM +0900, dblack@candle.superlink.net wrote:
> Hi --
> 
> On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, W. Kent Starr wrote:
> 
> > It seems that some (many?) confuse POLS with "there should be NO
> > surprises." Of course, the reality is that with anything, due to
> > lack of expereience, someone will be surprised by something. The
> > poetic view is that languagaes, natural or computer, like life and
> > love, would be quite dull without at least a hint of mystery. :-)
> 
> While hunting for "gentle dictator" citations before, I came
> across this, from more than a year ago:
> 
>   [question to matz about behavior of some method...]
>   |My question still remains - why? Although I agree that this may be
>   |convenient in some cases it contradicts the "Principle of Least
>   |Surprise" (at least for me). Or else, why isn't it implemented the
>   |same way for hashes too?
> 
>   [matz's reply]
>   (a) because I thought it was useful (note: I don't claim I've been
>     right).
>   (b) claiming PoLS is not allowed to complain about my decision. It's
>     spared for the dictator. ;-)
>   So let's not talk about PoLS, but talk about which is more useful.
> 

I was once said that the very existence of Ruby violates the POLS,
for, who'd expect such a beautiful yet convenient language to exist?
[perhaps it was me, can't remember :-)]

-- 
 _           _                             
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ 
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
	Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

<dark> eat Depends: cook | eat-out.
       But eat-out is non-free so that's out.
       And cook Recommends: clean-pans.
	-- Seen on #Debian