Bill Guindon wrote:

>Given the choices of reversing it, losing the '...' or leaving it
>alone, I'd probably go with leave it alone.  I've already paid the
>price of learning it, and I have used it, so might as well keep it.
>  
>
I agree that for now and the recent upcoming releases we leave it alone, 
but if Matz is going to work on making the language more natural and to 
have it make more sense then perhaps for future versions of Ruby (2.0?) 
this could be rethought. He has already made the distinction that Ruby2 
will not be backwards compatible.

Zach

P.S. - I would love to hear Matz's opinion on this but I know he is 
probably sleeping right now and I will have to wait untl tomorrow most 
likely.