On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, MikkelFJ wrote:
> Eventually, I landed on OO shapes examples:
> http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/cus/shapes/index.html
> Try compare Ruby with OCaml. OCaml is surprisingly compact.

Ruby's example could be more compact if it didn't carry all of this dead
weight. The guy who wrote it didn't use the metaclass to implement a
version of "attr" that would use the get/set naming convention, plus he
didn't understand what "attr" is for anyway, because he'd define both
#radius and #getRadius, and both #radius= and #setRadius.

I don't know many of the other languages -- there may be other
suboptimal implementations but I wouldn't be able to tell.

matju