On 17 f=E9vr. 09, at 01:16, David Masover wrote:
> I like Ruby's relaxed syntax. I like letting things like =20
> parentheses be implied, leading to interesting, emergent phenomena =20
> like hashes as named arguments. (Not that I would complain if the =20
> language implemented named arguments -- even better if I don't have =20=

> to use them as a hash -- so long as I can if I need to.)
>
> I like the ability to create good-looking DSLs, but that's similar =20
> to the above.

It's possible that without the humble feature of optional parentheses =20=

Rake would never have been invented and I might never have been =20
compelled to take a serious look at Ruby.  Since then I've often =20
wondered why parentheses are still so heavily used in most Ruby code =20
even when they  offer no compelling utility for most uses.  In =20
contrast, omitting unnecessary semicolons seems almost universal.  I =20
suppose parentheses are more habit forming for some reason.