On 8/17/05, Lyndon Samson <lyndon.samson / gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd say prototype means no classes, that is create an Object from another (
> Including Object ) and munge it at will, add/remove/change behaviour or
> variables.
> 
> I wonder if Ruby2 really needs classes? They seem to be de-emphasised in the
> Ruby world ( the one eyed duck is king ) and the other use for class like
> concept is interfaces which there seems to be alot of hostility towards.
> 

Hmm. I think it would be a _very_  bad idea. Prototypes would make
ruby's internals too fuzzy with non definition. Example: It is hard to
write a one size fits all library in Io. We have a common set of
idioms, but our code has nothing to lean on so many of these
primitives have to be built first before use. However, I might throw
in a mode for the with IoRuby. Too much of the core would have to
change so I am not sure if it would even be worth the change.

Brian.