From: Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
Date: 2001-11-04T21:30:42+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:24320] Re: Limits of dynamism?

On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
> 
Hi and thanks for your reply,

> Ruby's design goal is NOT extreme dynamism.  It must be done by
> something like "Ruby in Ruby".  But if dynamism can be accomplished by
>
Thats cool. (As a side note it would be great to get some of your
thoughts/philosophy on what kind of dynamism is suitable for Ruby: do
you add things that seems to be needed and doesn't "cost" much or do you
have some other overarching philosophy? When does dynamism support
human-oriented programming? I guess this is too general to be answered...)

> small changes, it would be merged in.  I will consider this one. > 
> 							matz.
Sounds great since I have been thinking of

  aClass === object

 as equivalent to

  object.kind_of?(aClass)

so if this is added PoMLS (Principle of My Least Surprise) would be
higher ;-). Not sure about PoOLS (Principle of Others Least
Surprise) though... ;-)

Regards,

Robert