SER wrote:
>> Once again, static typing reared its head on the mailing list, and
>> once again, the knights of the Ruby table slayed the beast...
>
> It would be more accurate to say that the Knights claimed the beast
> was:
>
> 1) impossible to implement
> 2) insignificant
> 3) not really a beast
>
> largely in that order.

Thanks for that comprehensive summary.  However I don't fully agree: in
Ruby land it *is* a beast - although it's not in Eiffel land.  Note:
context matters. :-)

Kind regards

    robert