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