From: Gary Lowder <Gary@...>
Date: 2005-04-20T15:45:17+09:00
Subject: Re: [EVALUATION] - E03c - The Ruby Object Model (Revised   Documentation)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Mitchell wrote:
| Let me see how closely I can predict Ilias's answer. Please note, this
| is a parody. I'm just taking the piss. (OT: Please don't pull me up for
| the apostrophe I have put in Ilias's name, some camps consider it
| correct, others don't, it's not hugely important).
|
| <PissTake>
|
| Mark Smith wrote:
|
|> Do you not know what "Object" is in Ruby?
|
|
| of course
|
...
...
...
| case in point
|
| </PissTake>
|


LOL, thanks David, I really liked that.  I'm only following the thread
out of morbid curiosity as to where this is going.

Florian and a few others who painstakingly take the time to provide
really well thought out answers get as a reply from Illias:

| sorry, I cannot read your document (nex context)

Now I know, people have wasted a cumulatively large/inordinate number of
hours explaining what won't be read.

I'm extreemly new to Ruby, and I got something out of Florian's
explainations, but Illias didn't give it the courtesy of a read.

I've decided Illias has a research project, possibly a thesis on the
line here.  Illias' job is to fill in these templates he's devised, with
differing languages to show some interrelation or correlation based on
<insert blah here>.

Illias has devised the great Huckleberry Finn ploy to paint his fence.
Illias, read the book, I won't explain what that statement means.  I'm
willing to bet the intended audience of this post knows.

Next, my two cents:

I'm really new to Ruby, and am working my way through Pickaxe II, a
great read Illias.  It really boils down to this, who gives a shit.  The
diagram in question has not, nor in my opinion will not, have any
bearing on how 99.99% of actual programmers will use or understand Ruby.

People, there is nothing left to see here in this thread, move along.
If someone won't read a book/passage you hand to him, why hand him the
book? Secondly, do not help paint the fence.

Now, it's one thing to ignore a sender's address, trivial with procmail.
~ How do you completely ignore all of a person's threads?  As any replys
to the thread will have different sender's addresses.  I don't think
procmail does that as elegantly.
~  /me goes to ponder

Gary.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCZfn9uXzcPSKHG/URAhGHAJ0Wzg087bpHLzHSMuiwGd5PuKMsyACfZxMv
fFN4/8cL9hIYrkMfjpa3DVc=
=ecki
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----