From: Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>
Date: 2002-04-01T21:49:58+09:00
Subject: Re: Why isn't Math object-oriented?

On Sun, 31 Mar 2002 15:44:46 GMT, matz@ruby-lang.org (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote:

>Hi,
>
>In message "Why isn't Math object-oriented?"
>    on 02/03/31, Bil Kleb <W.L.Kleb@larc.nasa.gov> writes:
>
>|What happened? Why did the idiom change?  Why isn't Math
>|implemented as a mixin for the Numeric class a'la Enumerable
>|or Comparable or Kernal, etc.?
>
>Because
>
>  sin(x)
>
>was the notation I used often.  One of the design princeple of Ruby is
>the "conservativeness", which is more important than orthogonality.

I'm OK with sin(x) working. I'm not OK with not being able to say

  r*theta.sin + r*theta.cos

because that's how every other similar operation would be expressed in Ruby. 

I needed to do one of these things recently. When I said 4.sqrt and it didn't
work, I was /very/ surprised. 

The two ways are not incompatible, as far as I can see.

Just one man's opinion, of course.
  

Ronald E Jeffries
http://www.XProgramming.com
http://www.objectmentor.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide whether it's true for you.