From: "Berger, Daniel" <djberge@...>
Date: 2003-12-04T00:28:03+09:00
Subject: Re: anything disappearing from Ruby for 2.0?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Uppal [mailto:chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 8:42 AM
> To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
> Subject: Re: anything disappearing from Ruby for 2.0?
> 
> 
> T. Onoma wrote:
> 
> > > [...]  Ruby *so nearly* fits the bill -- kinda fustrating ;-)
> >
> > I really don't understand this. You won't use Ruby b/c it has some 
> > EXTRA Perl-like features?
> 
> Yes, that's right.
> 
> Elegance, simplicity, clarity -- the things that (IMO) are 
> necessary for a language to have that "effortless" feeling -- 
> are dependent (among other
> things) on a reasonably complete absence of clutter and other warts.
> 
> For *me* the stuff starting on p216 of the pickaxe is a long 
> list of warts.  (I emphasise that I'm not knocking Ruby; it's 
> just that its current form is optimised for use in a certain 
> way -- shortish scripts -- that I'm not interested in, and so 
> those features of the language add clutter without providing 
> compensating value.)
> 
> > Just don't use them.
> 
> That's sort of like saying "if you don't like foul language 
> then don't swear"
> ;-)
> 
>     -- chris

Ridiculous.  Frankly, I don't believe you.  The notion that it is
somehow "optimized" for short scripts is absurd.  You are either
trolling or waiting for the perfect language that will never exist.

Ultimately, Ruby is just a tool, like any other programming language.
It's a great hammer, and a couple scratches on the handle (of any
language) wouldn't stop me from liking it.   You're always free to wait
for Rite or Perl 6.  See you in about 2 years.

Dan