There is a misunderstanding, I'm neither a Ruby fanboy nor an expert.

I already explained my motivation in detail, namely to show Perls strength.

> BTW, please translate these two to Ruby:

sub search {
  my $wanted = shift;
  foreach my $path (@_) {
   print "Searching in '$path'\n";
   find($wanted, $path);
  }
}
[download]

ehm, maybe something like?

paths.each do
  |path|
  puts "Searching in %{path}"
  find(wanted, path)
end
[download]

> Now how big is the leap from a single block to multiple in Perl and in Ruby? How hard is it to do something nontrivial in Perl and in Ruby? Ruby's syntax makes simple things short and awkward and hard things next to impossible.

No idea. Again, my intention was to show that Perl is so flexible that it can even emulate Ruby. Ruby claims to be a DSL language, while Perl can "dsl" Ruby =).

Why shouldn't we steal the sexy parts and add it to our portfolio?

update

> how do you pass the block to another subroutine/method?

according to Passing Blocks in Ruby Without &block there are basically two possibilities:

Either explicitly adding a &block in the signature or using Proc.new.

update

thats your question?

 
irb(main):006:0> wanted = "c"
=> "c"

irb(main):021:0> def search (paths, &block)
irb(main):022:1>    paths.each &block
irb(main):023:1> end 

irb(main):028:0> search ["a", "b", "c"] do
irb(main):029:1*   |path|
irb(main):030:1*   puts "Searching in #{path}"
irb(main):031:1>   puts wanted == path
irb(main):032:1> end
Searching in a
false
Searching in b
false
Searching in c
true
[download]