Markus wrote:
>     Ah, but that would be great!  (And many people are converging on
> this very ability.)  Not perhaps to write Pascal in ruby (though who
> knows?), but I have seen SQL, Postscript, and Forth (for a control
> system) integrated with ruby.  Plus little "built to suit languages"
> that were invented on the spot.  In every case, it was The Right Thing
> To Do (tm) and made what would otherwise have been a difficult problem
> much easier to write, to understand, and to maintain.

It depends on the context and the usage. I recall a shop (not mine, a friend
worked there) where management mandated that C would be used henceforth. But
these were diehard BASIC programmers. What they did was fulfill the minimum
requirement of using C by creating a "CBAS" layer ("looks like BASIC, tastes
like C") and mandating that junior programmers write to that layer. Sheer
madness.

But if you're talking about integrating SQL and such in useful, productive
ways, that is different.

 > You aren't seriously
> arguing that people using ruby in some way that you don't like is going
> to "undermine ruby" are you?  

What I like is ultimately irrelevant. I admit that "good code" and "bad code"
are subjective terms; but we all use those terms, do we not? I'm saying it is
theoretically possible that someday the amount of bad code in Ruby could exceed
the amount of good code. That, in my opinion, would undermine Ruby.

>      And, as an aside, if you aren't wanting to start a political
> discussion it's probably best not to compare the person you are writing
> to to a terrorist.  Just a thought.

I really truly never intended any such comparison. Please accept my apologies
for my poor phrasing.

I stand by the abstraction: A sufficiently open system can be turned against
itself to undermine that openness.

There are millions of ways to concretize that abstraction, but most of those
are otherwise unrelated to each other, and they range from the momentous to
the inconsequential. I have no reason and no desire to compare you to a terrorist
or any other form of criminal.

If you don't believe there is such a thing as "too much flexibility," then we
will have to agree to disagree.


Cheers,
Hal