From: James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Date: 2006-05-04T07:31:32+09:00
Subject: Re: Sharp knives and glue

David, aren't you a bit new here to be making friends this badly  
already?  ;)

On May 3, 2006, at 4:58 PM, David Pollak wrote:

> One of the things that needs improvement is protection against meta- 
> code
> breaking applications.  This is not an issue of a programmer  
> calling one set
> of APIs vs. another set.  This is an issue of the order in which  
> the classes
> were loaded impacting the execution of the code.

Obviously, this is your opinion.  I think it's pretty clear from this  
thread that it's not a popular opinion, but really the only opinion  
that matters in this instance is that of Matz.  I'm pretty sure I've  
seen him say that Ruby is meant to trust the programmer to do the  
right thing multiple times in the past, so I wouldn't hold your  
breath waiting for the patch.

> In Java (unless the developers have used AOP), I know that no  
> matter the
> order that my classes are loaded, the code will execute the same way.
>
> In Ruby this is not the case.  Because classes patch other classes,  
> the
> order in which the patches happen impact the code path.

I have no idea what you are saying here.  It honestly sounds like you  
are making things up now.  I'm pretty confident the order Ruby loads  
code is a well defined process.  Please show us some sample code.

> I am a Ruby lover and as a Ruby lover, I am working to make Ruby a  
> better
> environment for more people.

I would believe that a *lot* more if you had patched the Instiki  
issue you supposedly found.  Why don't you school us on the issue so  
we can go fix it for you.

James Edward Gray II