From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2008-03-22T19:30:00+09:00
Subject: Re: combine array(string) to string?

On 22.03.2008 03:45, Todd Benson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 3:39 AM, Robert Klemme
> <shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>  > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Robert Klemme
>>  > <shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>  I can see where that comes from and I did not want to disregard the
>>  point you were trying to make.  I just thought it a bit unfortunate that
>>  your wording kind of encourages the practice by insinuating that there
>>  is indeed something like a variable type declaration in Ruby. :-)

> Ahh, I see.  After reading my post again, I realize it wasn't that
> clear.  I was trying to cut down static practice.

Absolutely agree.

> There exists, however, typing in Ruby; it's just not temporally
> static.

Yes, that's true.  I would have to think hard to find a typeless 
programming language.  Can't remember any one - and it probably would 
not be useful anyway: if there is not at least a single type there are 
no values.  And without values there is no state to manipulate... :-)

>  It's interesting, I've even noticed people use the word
> "type" to describe a prototype (class) on this list.

Yeah, the subtleties of all types of type related terms in CS. :-)

Kind regards

	robert