From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2008-07-21T21:07:49+09:00
Subject: Re: protected members or explicit abstract classes?

Short answer:
   Because Ruby is not Java

Long answer:
  Ruby just has a different way approaching object oriented
programming. I believe that it is a more agile
  approach, and that abstract classes do not fit into Ruby's paradigm at all.

Very long answer:
   As a matter of fact I believe that Ruby should not even have
classes, class and type rhyme too strongly.
   I have developed different ways of doing object oriented
development in Ruby (traits, prototypes, pushable behavior) all of
them very slow, unfortunately. I really do not remember when I wanted
an abstract class or a
  protected member last when developing in Ruby. I am still guilty of
some code like "if String === s" but I
  hopefully one day will replace this with  "if s.behaves_like? StringBehavior".
  Therefore the quintessence of my reply is, do Ruby, do ducktyping
and ask yourself the question in some
  months time from now again!

Cheers
Robert

-- 
http://ruby-smalltalk.blogspot.com/

There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
--
Ernest Hemingway