From: Michael Campbell <michael_s_campbell@...>
Date: 2003-11-20T14:54:10+09:00
Subject: Re: "stereotyping"

Simon Kitching wrote:


> No, it's more to protect me!

*chuckle*

> It's to protect me from questions like:
> 
> "Hey, what kind of object is this method expecting? It isn't
documented
> anywhere and I can't understand the source code".
> 
> "Hey, I'm getting this message from the XXX library about do_foo
not
> existing on parameter bar. I must be doing something wrong. How do
I fix
> it?"
> 
> "Hey, I'm supposed to fix this library method. What parameters are
> people allowed to pass to it?"
> 
> and the corollary question:
> 
> "Hey, your team isn't making much progress on this project, despite
this
> Ruby language you suggested. Why shouldn't I fire you?"


I think it would be very illustrative to turn one of these guys loose

on a project with ruby and see what you get.  You might be 
presupposing problems will exist where they won't... or not.  Won't 
know till you try it though.

In very few cases have I just not found documentation where I needed 
it; I haven't had to go into src code much at all (I can't really 
remember a specific time, actually), and my only consternation so far

has been what I would consider dubious design choices, not typing
issues.

Ruby is the first language I've used that has this sort of typing, so

I'm still feeling my way around a bit, but I haven't found it a 
hinderance in any way.  (Nor, might I add, have I found this
wonderous 
freedom that's been espoused, but I don't think I'm writing idiomatic

ruby yet, either; I suspect my ruby has a decided perl or java "feel"

to it still.)

Still, I've been programming professionally for close to 20 years
now, 
so I do feel I have a handle on /some/ of the basics.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/