Hi all, I'm a Ruby newbie, and I'm reading now "the ruby way" and reading this book some comments make me think. I've a strong Smalltalk heritage, so I'm somewhat biassed. I would like to know... Why does common operators like "=" , "and", " .." , "or" etc ... can not be overloaded or redefined ?, maybe the complexity of the Ruby parser comes from the fact that everything is ALMOST an object or a method. Why is not "=" a method ? Same question for "and" and the rest of operators that can not be redefined, Does the actual implementation make life easier for the designer ? I say so because for me is more natural when everything is an object (without exceptions, here Ruby follows the rule pretty well) and a method is a method ever, not sometimes. Some methods are keywords, and some other are not v.g. loop vs. while. The every call is a method could simplify greatly the sintax parser (look at the Smalltalk parser). Why primitives are hidden ? In smalltalk you can call a primitive every time you want with a <primitive: aNumber> , this way the implementation of native methods, and in some way native Classes like String are not hidden from the programmer, freeing the programmer to change the behaviour if needed. Yes you can have the "required" clause and use binary libraries, but would not be much more "natural" to have a "require string" when you want to invoque string libraries instead of having them loaded all the time ?. I want to say here that the "primitive" keyword frees the language from it's implementation. This favours the everything is a module aproach. Sintax Sugar (SS), other thing difficult to understand for me, the question here is why ? Everything has exceptions very few things are orthogonal with the principe that must drive it, you can wite a.+(3) or a + 3 or a.+ 3 or a hundred other ways to write the same thing, yes, this gives you freedom, but a bad deserved (not needed) one. I use one form, but when I read programs from other persons the code seems strange and somewhat dificult to read. Sometimes SS is right, v.g. x +=1, but the every call is a method aproach could give you the same results without trouble, in this case += could be a method. As could be "++" or others. Undeclared variables, I don't know other people but I do fast typing and writing "aVariable" and "aVariabel" is a mistake that I can do very easily. Yes you can say, type more slowly, but this is not a solution, I would like to have a way to force the compiler to generate a warning when I use a non pre-declared (or pre asigned) variable. Why are Strings arrays of integers ? aString[0] is an integer, yes, it's the way it is, but I would like to have String as an array of chars, and char if you want as a descendant of Integer (nice election because a Unicode String is and array of double chars i.e. integer), I don't know you, but for me aString[i].chr =='x' is somewhat unnatural, because it breaks the semantic of a String, so it's not intuitive for me. Why is Ruby an interpreter ? Yes the less traditional bytecode aproach, can be harder (or not), but enables external optimizations more easily (JIT and similars) because the language are separated from the implementation, enables reduced footprint and gives faster execution times, yes, look at how Self executes programs, it's amazingly fast (and incredibly complex also), but a separated implementation could help develop better Ruby-engines. Don't get me wrong, I understand that Ruby is a young language that needs some maturing, and I love how easy is to learn, it's dinamicity and the fact that is a kind of mix between my loved Smalltalk, Self and other languages. In fact I'm writing this because I want to understand Ruby better and becasue I want to make some suggestions for future releases, maybe Mr. Matsumoto would like to consider some of them There are more things that I see as strange in Ruby, but this is enought for now ..... Please if I've make any inaccuracy , don't be too rude with me, I'm still learning, and I've a loooong way before understand everyting. I'm just looking for answers. Enric