jweirich / one.net wrote:

[...]

> Guy Hurst provided an updated Ruby version sometime ago.  Both the old
> and new Ruby versions are posted on my page (see above link).  You
> might wish to compare your version with Guy's.

The new version is indeed shorter and cleaner. However, the Ruby
version implements a slightle different approach to the shape example.
As far as I see, Chris has usually implemented a method that returns
the values of the different variables. Ie, instead of using @x,
self.x would be called. The getter and setter functions are not
needed for the rest of the example.

Ruby provides syntactic sugar which allows to write either approach
in a few lines. The OCaml program, however, is significantly longer
because of the implementation of getX. But then, I disagree with the
subject. For me, the question is not Ruby vs. Ocaml. Rather, it is
Ruby and Ocaml, because both are nice languages and fill in different
niches of application.
   Benedikt