From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2005-08-04T00:10:51+09:00
Subject: Re: [RCR] array or with non-array

Hi,

In message "Re: [RCR] array or with non-array"
    on Thu, 4 Aug 2005 00:03:44 +0900, Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@yahoo.com> writes:

|> I know but it is a matter of cost both efficiency and implementation.
|> Since current "restriction" covers 99.99% usage of strings, it is
|> kinda hard to pay cost to implement full polymorphic arguments like
|> you mentioned.

|Right now, it probably covers 100%.  I think it is hard to
|determine the usefulness of many features like this until it
|they are implemented.

But you need to convince its usefulness before someone implement it.

|> Convenience is important, sometimes more than pure duck typing.
|
|I'm more of a purist and thus prefer the purity over the
|convenience.  And I know there may not be many in my camp.

I don't know about numbers, but a purist were not able to create Ruby.
He would create something very different from Ruby.

|It would definitely increase the code size.  But, it shouldn't
|change the run-time efficiency.

I wasn't talking about performance cost.  It was implementation cost.

							matz.