From: "Mauricio Fernández" <mfp@...>
Date: 2005-11-03T04:34:59+09:00
Subject: Re: ruby-dev summary 27393-27541

On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 04:23:50AM +0900, David A. Black wrote:
> >>Of course, Ruby Behaviors had some issues, especially thread safety --
> >>which is what got the discussion going about selector namespaces at
> >>RubyConf 2001 :-)
> >
> >Wasn't Ruby Behaviors dynamically scoped though?
> >It seems Ruby's selector namespaces are more likely to be static.
> 
> That was one of the things on the list of unresolved questions in the
> summary.  

Yes, that's why I only said it seemed more likely, based on the original
discussion and matz's reference to JavaScript's namespaces, see
  http://www.mozilla.org/js/language/js20/core/namespaces.html

> I'm actually not entirely clear on what static would mean in this context.

Lexically scoped.

-- 
Mauricio Fernandez