Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz / ruby-lang.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: Ruby Syntax: 'initialize' versus 'init'"
>     on Sat, 4 Feb 2006 10:50:11 +0900, Clint Checketts <checketts / gmail.com> writes:
>
> |Am I missing any major reasoning behind using the term 'initialize'?
> |(Besides the fact that is is the status quo)
>
> It can be very critical when the name of initializing method conflicts
> with others, so that I chose "initialize" to avoid potential problems.
> Besides that, the name was derived from T language (Scheme dialect).

Interesting you mention T, one question I always wanted to ask is:
Did the T object system influence the design of the Ruby object system?
(Or do you wish it did? ;))

> 							matz.
-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen / gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org