From: David Alan Black <dblack@...>
Date: 2001-11-17T02:23:28+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:25534] Re: Method overloading (option) Was: Re:

Hello --

On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Clemens Wyss wrote:

> As I said in my initial post I would regard this feature as an
> "appetizer" for C++/Java/...-converts, which often believe that they need
> typechecking (and methodoverloading).
>
> So as a first go we could take Guy's (optional) parameter-type-checking
> implementation AND still NOT allow method overloading.
>
> class Foo
>   def typeCheckedBar(String aString)
>     ...
>   end
>   def rubyWayBar(aString)
>     ...
>   end
> end
>
> On the other hand the question remains, whether my reasoning (see above)
> is sufficient to add such a feature to Ruby?

I have essentially no C++/Java background, so I don't want to pretend
to say how important this particular thing may or may not be.
But... I will say that the whole idea of having features in Ruby that
exist to attract or convert people worries me.  (I'm not saying that's
the only reason this particular thing might enter the language, just
commenting on what you've said.)

I just don't think it's good for Ruby.  Ruby doesn't seem to have much
trouble attracting people :-)  And, possibly, it may be a zero-sum
game: for every C++/Java person who feels more at home because Ruby
has XYZ, there will be someone who came to Ruby to escape XYZ and now
doesn't like it as much.

I know this is all very abstract... just wanted to comment.


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack@candle.superlink.net
work: blackdav@shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav