Hi,

Inferring from people's response, I realize that this subject is rather
controversial.  But if we can think positively just for a moment, all the
discussions can also be viewed for the goodness of Ruby itself.

I don't think the intention is ever to cannibalize or destroy Ruby at
all.  It is more to give Ruby some challenges, and if it is viewed that
the current Ruby can answer these challenges well, then we just move
on.  It is good if Ruby stays as the current Ruby.  However, language
technology also continues to progress.  When I first learned Tcl, I was
very excited about it.  But then I found Perl was easier and more
powerful.  And then I found Python was easier and as powerful.  And then I
found that Ruby was more consistent, as easy, and as powerful.  Based on
my personal experience, some languages got popular and then faded away,
while others stay for a long time.  Ruby also has two choices: to remain
the same or to change with new technologies.  I really do hope that the
current Ruby will withstand the test of time for many-many years to come,
just like the C language.  But I also hope that Ruby will not stay the
same just for the sake of staticity, but because it can always answer new
challenges in its current form.  However, when the time does come for a
new change (like Perl to Perl 6?), I hope that Ruby will also.

That's why probably two groups will be good.  comp.lang.ruby discusess on
exploring the power of Ruby as it is, while comp.lang.ruby.beyond
discusses on possible future paths that may be taken by Ruby.  I think the
discussions on private variables and method overloading are really
appropriate for comp.lang.ruby.beyond.  On the other hand, if it turns
out that the current Ruby is close to the ultimate language (just like
C is probably the "ultimate assembly language"), then the discussions on
comp.lang.ruby.beyond will die by themselves...

Regards,

Bill
=============================================================================
Albert Wagner <alwagner / tcac.net> wrote:
> "Off Topic" can be very subjective.  Personally, I view all this talk of new 
> languages created by cannibalising/destroying Ruby to be OT.  I would prefer 
> that ruby-talk concentrate on exploring the power of Ruby as it is.  Matz is 
> aware of how he intends to enhance and iron out the wrinkles in Ruby, and 
> judging from versions 1.x, I am delighted with his vision.