>>41
the c♯ one was just to point out that you were wrong when you wrote

> (with exception of Perl) they are all more or less similar to C++.

all four examples of those examples are simpler than your ruby example, and two of them are more succinct. you don't seem to realize that neither "simple" nor "succinct" are directly related to the number of characters. for example, for i in 1 2 3; do echo $i; done is a lot simpler than :(){:|:&};:, which is much shorter.
and the prolog one isn't as simple and succinct as it could be:

forall(between(1, 10, N), format("~d ", N)).