> Also, it doesn't look (and feel) good for you to speak derisively of Ruby. > The .. and ... idioms in Ruby are logical, consistent, and well documented, > and do not cause confusion.
They are ugly and illogical. And my respect for you and Matz does not stop me from being harsh on features of programming languages. I can distinguish between people and abstract non-living things. I'm sure you can do the same. > Why did you make the assumption I didn't compile my code with --d:release? I > did. What I hoped you appreciated was that using fixed numerical values are > much more performamnt than using <b in real code. Maybe you don't care, but I > hope you would. 2 seconds faster for `-1` vs `..<` makes no sense, we need to look at the concrete code and at the produced assembly code to explain the difference. Or maybe it's just noise -- if it runs for several minutes a 2s difference means nothing. Either way unexplainable, likely unreproducable performance differences are a bad foundation to settle disputes in coding styles.
