Zach Dennis <zdennis / mktec.com> wrote:
> > Exactly, Java is strongly typed, it tries to catch as many violations
> > as it can at static time but catches them all at runtime.
> 
> So are you just agreeing to the obvious or are you implying that 
> catching these exceptions in Java is preferred over not-having to catch 
> those exceptions in Ruby?

I'm just clarifying my statement to PA, since he asked for a
clarification.  He seemed to be claiming that Ruby had the same strong
typing property as Java manifestly has.

I was and am still trying to understand whether Ruby *really* does
have strong typing or not as the Original Poster claimed, and if so
what the advantage of that is in the Ruby context.  I think LS has put
it best so far.

It wasn't really my intent to pick sides but to gain a deeper
understanding of what it is people are claiming to be advantages of
Ruby.  

I am very much enjoying Ruby and the work of matz and friends.

Cheers,
Navin.