From: Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@...>
Date: 2005-12-16T04:32:40+09:00
Subject: Re: Easy Duck-Typing

dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
> Hi --
> 
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Daniel Schierbeck wrote:
> 
>> This will make it easier to add type checking to your methods. Let me 
>> know if you think the method belongs in Object or another class, 
>> rather than in the Kernel module.
> 
> This may be useful to you, but it isn't duck typing.  In fact, it
> appears to be more or less the opposite, in concept.  Here, you're
> checking class ancestry and gatekeeping your method calls and return
> values based on that ancestry.  The thrust of duck typing, as I
> understand it, is that you just ask an object to do something --
> without regard to its class, and quite likely without doing a
> respond_to? call first.
> 
> 
> David

I guess you're right, I actually realised it moments after i sent the 
mail. I still find it useful though, when you really *do* need an object 
of a specific type.

"Implicit conversion" may be better :)


Cheers,
Daniel