On Jul 21, 2008, at 3:47 PM, Robert Dober wrote:

> This is exactly what I said though, your idea would break this rule as
> there would be NilClass#dup! but no NilClass#dup.

Actually, there is a NilClass#dup.  That's why you get a type error  
and not a no method error.

-- 
-- Jim Weirich
-- jim.weirich / gmail.com