----- Original Message ----- 
From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz / zetabits.com>
To: ruby-talk ML <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 11:38 PM
Subject: [ruby-talk:16076] Re: Block arguments vs method arguments


> Hi,
> 
> In message "[ruby-talk:16070] Re: Block arguments vs method arguments"
>     on 01/05/31, "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000 / hypermetrics.com> writes:
> 
> |If we're not going to have both, I'd vote for: Change the meaning of the
> ||...| notation, fix all the old code that it breaks, and move on.
> 
> This is a price for a mistake I made.  I feel really sorry that YOU
> have to pay the price.

Speaking only for myself... this guilt is surely misplaced. 

You gave us a great language. OK, it has a quirk or two.

Those who don't like it can stick to their COBOL.

When Neil Armstrong stepped on the moon and got his words a 
little mixed up, it was regrettable. But he was still the first man 
on the moon.  :)

There comes a point when "backward" compatibility... is exactly that.

The syntactic beauty of Ruby is assured the same way the semantic
beauty is... by looking ahead, not back.

Hal