[ruby-talk:01093] Re: YADQ (Yet Another Dumb Question)

Hi,

=begin off-topic

OK, let me define a dumb question:

  A question about the things which are

    * clearly documented in the reference manual, or
    * I mentioned here recently

By this definition, yours are not dumb at all.  We, Japanese are known
to be humble (at least pretending to be), but you are more than that.

=end off-topic

In message "[ruby-talk:01083] YADQ (Yet Another Dumb Question)"
    on 00/01/10, Dave Thomas <[e-mail]> writes:

|Why don't I get a warning for this (at either global scope or within a 
|class definition)?
|
|   A = 1
|   A = 2

It used to give a error before.  But it was not good for

  * interactive programming, e.g.

     irb(main):001:0> FOO = 44
     44
     ... oops, it should be 55! ...
     irb(main):002:0> FOO = 55
     ERROR!!!

  * reloading files, evaluate program fragment by eval.

After some consideration, I felt even warnings are irritating, so I
decided to let redefining constants upto programmers' responsibility.
I know they aren't really constants by this, but I think it's OK for
everyday use.

							matz.