From: "enduro (Sven Suska)" <sven715rt@...>
Date: 2007-05-15T20:07:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Why was the "Symbol is a String"-idea dropped?

Ooops!

sorry if I came across rude in any way.

I don't want to "own" the thread.
But I am interested in my question,
so I was glad that someone repeated it,
at a time when all the answers up to that point had not yet answered it.

Robert Dober schrieb:

> The fact that the original idea is a big paradigm shift does not
> answer your question?

Sorry, no. If someone had told me that this fact was the basis for the 
decision of the core team,
that would have answered my question.
(Because the fact alone is not compelling: If a paradigm shift is 
possible and good then why not shift?)

And also, I thought that this was the right place for posting the question.
(Actually, until yesterday I didn't know that I could post on ruby-core,
I thought it was just for "cracks", because it's read-only on 
ruby-forum.com)

Kind Regards
Sven


And here again, Robert Dober's full text:

> On 5/15/07, enduro <sven715rt@suska.org> wrote:
>
>> Thank you all for your replies.
>>
>> And thank you, Xavier, for keeping the focus on my original intention.
>> Yes, I was not asking about general arguments for designing a class
>> hierarchy, but for the reasons for this particular decision of the
>> ruby-core team.
>
> I really have not taken offense. However if you are interested in that
> only you might post to ruby-core only.
> I am kind of surprised that the considerations of Rick and YHS are
> considered as OT.
> If you do not like them maybe it would be polite to ignore them. But
> talking about the topic on *this* list and ignoring all background
> information about what symbols are and have been is kind of weird.
> Please remember that Ruby has its inheritance in other languages
> owning symbols as I believe to have pointed out.
> The fact that the original idea is a big paradigm shift does not
> answer your question?
>
> I honestly do not understand that.
>
> Threads just evolve I do not feel that they belong to OP :).
> They do not belong to me either of course ;).
> Cheers
> Robert


Another question:
Who is

> YHS

?

Regards, Sven