Hi --

On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Paul Prescod wrote:

[re: Greg's slides]

> On Philosophy:
> ==============
>
> Is this really how a Ruby programmer would characterize POLS? To be
> honest, the way you state it, I wouldn't be interested in _either_
> Python or Ruby. A language that tries to cater to everyone's tastes is
> doomed to failure. Sounds like the popular image of Ada!

According to Matz, POLS is the principle of least surprise to Matz :-)
It definitely isn't about catering to all tastes.  To quote Matz:

  I may surprise you, or even make mistake (often).  But still, since
  everyone has different background, I can not satisfy everyone.  From
  this reason, I don't count POLS as the rationale for any RCR.

and, also perhaps relevant:

  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.

POLS has definitely been overworked and overextended as a concept
applying generally to every encounter everyone has, or should expect
to have, with Ruby.  In this connection, the "cater to everybody's
tastes" characterization might inadvertently suggest that Ruby is a
kind of idiom grab-bag and/or designed, chameleon-like, to resemble
any or all of its antecedents depending on who's using it.

Besides, as many have said before me, Ruby is full of surprises; they
just happen to be pleasant surprises :-)


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack / superlink.net
work: blackdav / shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav