From: Gavri Fernandez <gavri.fernandez@...>
Date: 2005-02-06T02:35:34+09:00
Subject: Re: top-level object? top-level methods?

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:50:48 +0900, itsme213 <itsme213@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I fully agree with the goal of making procedural programmers at ease. This
> approach does not sacrifice that goal. But it does affect existing OO +
> procedural code, hence a compatibility mode for this change? Someone
> knowingly combining OO and procedural code can always use modules and
> includes if they need to approximate the old behavior. So I am not sure the
> namespace pollution is worth it.

It was just a couple of days back that I commented on a post
(http://www.livejournal.com/users/premshree/39574.html) in Live
journal where I said that Ruby is so cool because it is completely
object-oriented, yet allows for procedural programming.
+1 for keeping things as they are.

What does a top-level object mean anyway? I never understood that. If
someone would care to explain........ ( C++, Java background here)

Thank you,
Gavri