From: Rich Kilmer <rich@...>
Date: 2001-12-08T07:23:04+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:27869] Re: Trolling ;)

refactor:

class Vacuum
  def Vacuum.suck
    puts "sucking..."
  end
end

Vacuum.suck

sorry...you need "behavior" to suck ;)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Mason [mailto:ralph.mason@telogis.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:20 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: [ruby-talk:27860] Re: Trolling ;)
> 
> 
> class Vacuum
> 
> end
> 
> suck = Vacuum.new
> 
> So it appears that ruby can suck also.
> 
> Ralph
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phlip" <phlip_cpp@yahoo.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
> To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>; <undisclosed-recipients:>
> Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 10:15 AM
> Subject: [ruby-talk:27857] Re: Trolling ;)
> 
> 
> > James Britt (ruby-talk ML) wrote:
> >
> > > Ruby in a Nutshell was announced on use.perl.org.
> > >
> > > The tongue-in-cheek heading says,
> > > "Of course, no Perl programmers like or are interested in 
> anything that
> > > isn't Perl, so I'm sure no one will want this book, be interested in
> Ruby,
> > > care to read An Introduction to Ruby[link], or even remember 
> this story
> > > two minutes after reading it. Right?"
> >
> > Perl sucks.
> >
> > --
> > Phlip
> >
> > (Special note to the humor-challenged; review my brilliant, insightful
> > comments in the recent thread called "Ruby vs. Python: Decisions,
> > Decisions" before leaping to Perl's defense. The programming 
> industry [and
> > the Unices] would not be where they are today without Perl.)
> >
>