From: Pat Maddox <pergesu@...>
Date: 2006-05-16T07:25:03+09:00
Subject: Re: begining programmer questions

Exactly.

"That may seem kind of confusing, and that's really because you
shouldn't be thinking of it in these partitioned terms anyway.  All we
really care about when playing with an object is whether we can make
method calls on it without our program blowing up."

In my opinion, thinking in terms of types serves merely as an obstacle
to taking advantage of Ruby's power.

Pat

On 5/15/06, Jake McArthur <jake.mcarthur@gmail.com> wrote:
> I prefer to just think of Ruby as not having any types at all. All I
> care about is whether the object responds to the correct messages,
> and if it doesn't, all you have to do is make it so that it does. Add
> methods, mix in modules, whatever suits the case.
>
> - Jake McArthur
>
> On May 15, 2006, at 4:26 PM, Pat Maddox wrote:
>
> > Perhaps this is nitpicking, perhaps not, but it's incorrect to say
> > that you cannot change an object's type (to paraphrase).
>
>
>