From: Jeff <cohen.jeff@...>
Date: 2006-12-30T01:31:54+09:00
Subject: Re: What we have here...


Robert Klemme wrote:
> On 29.12.2006 01:42, atbusbook@aol.com wrote:
> > Sorry blank post. but saying ruby has no encapsulation of methods is
> > funny, it is pretty stupid if you ask me.
>
> Where exactly do you read that in the article?
>

I think he was referring to this (starts at the bottom of page 1 of the
original article):

"Popular dynamically typed languages such as Smalltalk, Self, Python,
and Ruby still provide no encapsulation at all, or support it in a very
limited way."

and then later on page 3:

"None of these languages provide any support for declaring internal
methods that cannot be invoked from outside of the class in which they
are defined."

Jeff