From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2005-08-18T04:04:36+09:00
Subject: Re: Prototype-based / Ruby question

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, David A. Black wrote:

> Hi --
>
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Eric Mahurin wrote:
>
>> Using the term "type" by itself instead of something else helps
>> perpetuate this fallacy.  Object#type is a synonym of
>> Object#class.
>
> Yes, but that use is deprecated.  The explanation given by Matz in the
> past, as I recall, is that he chose to add the synonym "type" because,
> at the time, there were problems parsing "class" as a non-keyword,
> even in method-call position.
>
> It's unfortunate that that happened, because it's certainly fanned the
> flames of the misunderstanding, but it was for understandable
> technical reasons and hopefully it will be resolved so that "type" can
> disappear.

In fact, I'm happy to report:

$ /usr/local/lib/ruby-cvs/bin/ruby -ve '"".type'
ruby 1.9.0 (2005-08-06) [i686-linux]
-e:1: undefined method `type' for "":String (NoMethodError)


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net