Hi chiaro,

I'm not a regular programmer. So I guess I don't have a chance to discuss
with you and the right level. ;-)

For me the subject we discuss it is a matter of taste. And for my taste the
ruby way is OK.

I like it the way it is and for me it is not surprising and thats why I
wrote my post.

> my tests would fail, I guess.

Yes this should happen.


> I also program in VBA, where you have a 'property set' feature that is
> roughly the equivalent of the 'name=' operator in Ruby and it has
> never been a problem.  the few times this error slipped through, the
> tests always caught it.

Wouldn't it be better if they don't appear at the first place?
 
Maybe you could explain me why the other way is better.
I'm open minded so your opinion would really helps do to extend my
knowledge.


with kind regards

Markus