From: Conrad Schneiker <schneiker@...>
Date: 2001-08-26T14:55:00+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:20388] Re: The word "dynamicity"

"Dave Thomas" <Dave@PragmaticProgrammer.com> wrote:
> "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> writes:
>
> > Do you think "dynamicity" is a valid word?
> > Someone pointed out to me it's not in Webster's
> > (though I'll bet it's in the OED).
>
> You're absolutely right - it's in the Compact OED it's a synonym of
> 'valence' (in the chemical sense).
>
> > I don't always want to say "the dynamic nature
> > of Ruby" and I can't say "dynamicness."
>
>   As Ruby is dynamic, ....  ?

And perhaps, "Ruby's dynamical nature, ...."?

And to preemptively capture the strategic marketing neologistical high
ground,

    Ruby's  _dynamatic_ object system that seems to almost automatically
adapt to your programming needs.
    Ruby _dynamagically_ combines the principle of least surprise with
object system flexibility.

Conrad