Richard Dale wrote:

> Tim Hunter wrote:
> 
> 
>>Frequently. Google comp.lang.ruby for 'duck typing' and be prepared for a
>>lot of reading. Warning: it's a divisive topic.
> 
> No, not really - 

Yes, *really*!

> I don't see this as divisive -

Oh yes it is!




I'm pulling your leg.



"Ruby needs some way to do static typing" is yet another permathread 
here.  My take on the general argument [0] is that those calling for 
some sort of type checking believe that duck typing is not robust enough 
for larger applications, especially as the number of project members 
grows.

Some folks disagree.  This has prompted some lengthy discussions. 
"Divisive" is subjective, but plausibly applicable.

James

[0] Please do not correct me or start another thread on static typing. 
Please.  Really.