Hi -- On Sun, 16 Jul 2006, why the lucky stiff wrote: > On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 08:41:17AM +0900, Hal Fulton wrote: >> Pe?a wrote: >>> fr hal: >>> # Actually it was only last week that I first saw this term >>> # being used in the Ruby community. I wonder if it's too >>> # late to squash it? >>> >>> you took a vacation ;-) >>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/browse_thread/thread/9699d659bd806203 >>> >> >> Now people are applying it to Ruby. That bothers me >> a little. > > The term "hacking" used to have a negative slant on it, too. It's not the term, > though, it's the slant that matters. The term can't be taken back, you know? > So what exactly does it mean? > > Well, because it's derogatory in origin, it's also ambiguous. It's got a nested > image of primates performing informal needlework. Conversely, there's an image > of crafty and agile treeswingers going up into the lofts, the places where the > rigid, upright (sticky and pale) homosapien fails. > > Plus, I like the irony of Rubyists monkeypatching the word monkeypatching: > gutting it, redefining it, and dangerously executing it in public. But why dance, in the first place, to the tune of whoever says whatever about Ruby and/or other scripting languages? No nuance of "monkeypatching" resonates with anything in or about Ruby -- so why act under an imperative to enter into a relationship with it? I know, I know -- my vision of Ruby's design as unified and not split into programming/metaprogramming, or good/3vi1, or [whatever the opposite of monkeypatching is]/monkeypatching, is hopelessly Utopian. I plead guilty. (Can someone please follow up with a witticism about the Scopes ("monkey") trial? :-) David -- http://www.rubypowerandlight.com => Ruby/Rails training & consultancy http://www.manning.com/black => RUBY FOR RAILS (reviewed on Slashdot, 7/12/2006!) http://dablog.rubypal.com => D[avid ]A[. ]B[lack's][ Web]log dblack / wobblini.net => me