Karl von Laudermann wrote:
> The current convention for Ruby source file names is to end them with
> a .rb extension. This strikes me as too minimalistic. Why not .ruby?

What is your suggestion for .rbw (on Windows)? .rubyw? (Probably not, 
since you _hate_ abbreviation :-). .rubywin? .rubywindows?

Also there might be .rbc (for compiled bytecode) or .rb2 in the future. 
I'd hate to have too many letters as extension names.

I think there is also .rbx and a few others being used.

IMO, having a short "rb" prefix for all these is better than "ruby".

-- 
dave