Re: ruby

[Scott McKay <address@hidden>]

At 06:58 AM 11/27/01, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 11:42:14PM -0500, Dan Weinreb wrote:
> >    From: Lennon Day-Reynolds <lennon@day-reynolds.com>
> >    Secondly, and more fundamentally, I find it much harder to get
> >    excited about a language that's strictly OO. I fled Java for that
> >    very reason
> >
> > Gee, you really abandoned Java for such a small problem?
>
>You've hit the crux of it. It's not a small problem at all. If a
>language doesn't fit the way I think about programming, it's not going
>to be fun to use.


This is not meant to be flame-bait, even though it may sound
indistinguishable from trolling.

If a language doesn't fit the way you (*) think about programming,
perhaps you (*) should re-evaluate the way you are thinking.

(*) "You" does not necessarily mean you personally.  There are
lots of people who have rigid, dogmatic ways of thinking about
how programming should work.  The point I am trying to make is
that it's often worth getting your head around other ways of thinking
about programming (check out Snobol, Prolog, Eiffel, ML, e.g.).
Heck, I've been writing a non-trivial Java program lately, and I
discovered there's even one thing I actually like about Java.