Hi,

In message "Re: Larry Wall's comments on Ruby"
    on 02/09/07, Denys Usynin <usynin / hep.upenn.edu> writes:

|I think this whole Least Surprise Principle is a load of bullshit that 
|is invoked far too often for no good reason. It has a fancy name, but I 
|translate it to myself as "when matz made Ruby he made sure the way it 
|worked made sense to him". Excuse me, isn't it how all languages are(or 
|should be) made?

Although I admit the "Principle of Least Surprise" has bigger impact
than I expected, I still disagree all languages are following the
principle.

Language designers are often too near-sighted in designing his/her
language.  They often focus too much on "what it can do".  But in
reality we have to focus on "how it can solve" or "how it makes you
feel in programming".  I think this is a difference.

I also admit that Ruby offers bunch of surprises when you meet it for
the first time.  But once you become familiar with it, you will feel
comfortable programming in it. 

Believe me, not all languages are made equal.  Some (or many)
languages just don't make you feel comfortable even after you've
mastered it.  Their design just don't care how you feel while you
program in.

If "POLS" is not a proper word for the concept, and you have a better
slogan for the concept, I'd glad to switch.

							matz.