On 5/24/05, Brian Schröäer <ruby.brian / gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24/05/05, pat eyler <pat.eyler / gmail.com> wrote:
> I understand your motivation, but I think it is showing something that
> I would rate as ugly ruby code to the world. If you really want a
> string, you could have used to_str.
> 
> Please don't feel offended. 

No worries.  I have thick skin.  :)

> I'm not even maintaining a library and
> have until now never managed to really develop something test first,
> let alone write an article and get it published. I feel that ugly
> maybe is a bit too strong a word, but I can't find anything more
> subtle.

Inelegant?   It's a valid point, but as James Britt points out in a
new (related) thread, it's an fine line between trying to make a 
point and striving for elegant code.   I'll tell you what, I'd be happy
to take on reviewers for upcoming articles.  Contact me offline
if you have an interest in helping refine code or prose.

> 
> I think it is important to show good ruby style in articles, and
> ducktyping is one part of good style.
> 
> best regards,
> 
> Brian Schröäer
> 
> --
> http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/
> 
> Stringed instrument chords: http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/
> 
> 


-- 
thanks,
-pate
-------------------------
We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because
they want to know something else, and would therefore only
misunderstand what we said
- the Raven   (George MacDonald, Lilith)