In article <1117115503.104127.21363.nullmailer / x31.priv.netlab.jp>, 
matz / ruby-lang.org says...
> Besides that, he doesn't understand what POLS means.  Since someone
> will surprise for any arbitrary choice, it is impossible to satisfy
> "least surprise" in his sense.  The truth is two folds: a) when there
> are two or more choices in the language design decision, I take the
> one that makes _me_ surprise least.  b) as a result, you will have
> less surprise in Ruby than other languages, once you have accustomed
> to it.

Nicely put.  I suggest we start referring to the POMLS - Principle of 
Matz's Least Surprise.  That way, if anyone ever debates it, you can pop 
in and say "I wasn't surprised at all," thus authoritatively refuting 
the argument!

-- 
Jay Levitt                | 
Wellesley, MA             | I feel calm.  I feel ready.  I can only
Faster: jay at jay dot fm | conclude that's because I don't have a
http://www.jay.fm         | full grasp of the situation. - Mark Adler