From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2007-09-30T03:12:18+09:00
Subject: Re: Why dynamic languages for ActiveRecord..?

Phlip wrote:
> "Yes and..."
> 
> That's consultant speak. We practice not saying "No but". (-;
> 
> The narrowest detail here is Java does not permit def my_column=, so its 
> code will always look ugly and resist elegance, especially when doing 
> Active Record.
> 
> In general, Ruby is more suited than Java for anything in Java's space, 
> except the crackerjack marketing to "enterprises". We are working on a 
> bot for that. (-;

Would that be a "Yes bot"?

<ducking>