On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:07:54 +0200, Grzegorz Chrupa• £¬ wrote:
> Simon Strandgaard wrote:
> 
> 
>> By saying that I should also mention that I never will abandon
>> Ruby for perl6.
> 
> Even if perl6 turns out to be a better, more powerful language (not
> particularly likely but certainly not impossible)?
> 
> Then you must be a deeply religious person, at least when it comes to
> programming languages.

I have been programming in many languages, and Ruby has by far the 
nicest syntax, while at the same time being that language where
I can express what ever I want, without restrictions. 

perl6 is complex, so you can probably do some powerful things with
little typing. However I am sure that complexity will demand extra 
brain-resources to remember, which in the end will steal resources
you should have been using for thinking. There is too much noise.

I am not religious. In the past I was used to lower quality 
languages (Amos, C++, pascal, java). I didn't have any real quality
demands. But today with Ruby I am getting a feeling for quality.
Same as convincing a Rolls-Royes user, to switch to a Yogo,
even though both cars can take you to the same place.

--
Simon Strandgaard