From: Friedrich Dominicus <frido@...>
Date: 2002-09-12T14:59:25+09:00
Subject: Re: Larry Wall's comments on Ruby

"Gavin Sinclair" <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> writes:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Friedrich Dominicus" <frido@q-software-solutions.com>
> 
> 
> > matz@ruby-lang.org (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:
> > >
> > > Multi-method is kinda like multiple inheritance.  It is *natural*
> > > extension of the original concept.  It is theoretically clean.  But it
> > > is easy to make thing too complex with them.  Only smart people can
> > > use their full power.  If you see no problem, it's because you're
> > > smarter than me. ;-)
> >
> > Sorry I do  not like this smarter than anyone else stuff. even with a
> > ;-) You do not have to use multiple inheritance if you do not like
> > it. You do not have to use Multimethods if you don't like it. And you
> > can avoid using a lot of other thing if you do not like them.
> >
> > But it's your (the programmers) choice. If the langauge does not offer
> > those facilities you simply do not have a choice.
> 
> A language cannot offer every programming construct under the sun.  Ruby
> doesn't offer pointer arithmetic, or even manual memory-management, for
> example, and we are all grateful for it.  "Choice" in languages is a delicate
> thing.  That's why we have language designers, to find the balance.  It's
> certainly good for a language to provide a liberal dose of choice, but
> ultimately you need to exercise choice of languages as well.
I agree. Anyway other choose C because of pointer artithmetic can
because of manual memory managment. 

> 
> I personally am glad that multiple inheritence does not exist in Ruby.  It
> gives me the choice to escape from it in other languages.  Choice works in
> mysterious ways :)
No that is perfect, it's what I understand under choice. You do not
like MI so you're looking for languages not offering it. That's one
approach another might be just not using the features available in one
language. And that is what many C++ programmers do. They have their
reasons to restrict themselves I assume.

> 
> Despite the discussion and links, I haven't picked up on what multimethods
> actually are, so I can't comment on those.

It was explained in another mail. So I won't comment on it.

Regards
Friedrich