On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 07:49:02 +0900, Joseph Lenton wrote:

> As far as I've understood it, in Ruby it's not about what the type is
> but what the type can do. i.e. does it respond to a specific method. So
> maybe generics in Ruby would make sense if you could restrict objects
> based on what they can do. For example an array which can only hold
> obejct that respond to the to_str method.

Right; I'm taking a Java course which will be covering Generics and, in 
Java, this a big part of the point of Generics:

an array which can only hold objects which implement a specified 
interface.


-Thufir