Phlip wrote:

>>C# is heavily taking ideas from Ruby right now -- which is no surprise,
>>really.
> 
> Then when you retrofit a language design feature, instead of building it in 
> from scratch, you can't use it to simplify everything. Even its syntax will 
> suck.
> 
> Block closures provide an order of magnitude simpler designs. So unless you 
> add them to a language first, you fill your legacy libraries up with cruft. 
> Then when you retrofit them, they need more difficult syntaxes to compete.

C# has always had anonymous functions, but only recently they have added 
a nice syntax and closures to it. This means that it is fully compatible 
with the existing standard library.

True, C# isn't as nice as Ruby, but I like to see Ruby inspire other 
languages.