On Jan 27, 2012, at 10:43 , Chad Perrin wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 06:31:38PM +0900, Gunther Diemant wrote:
>>> You're right, that's much better -- apart from the fact I have yet =
to
>>> come up with a single good reason for dynamic class names.
>>=20
>> Test cases in a dsl test language like MiniTest/Spec or RSpec
>>=20
>> describe "Foo" do
>> end
>> #=3D> Class FooTest < MiniTest::TestCase
>=20
> Why is that better than storing unnamed classes in a hash with keys =
for
> the "names" instead of actually, dynamically assigning names to new
> hashes?

<ass owner=3D"chad">
  <pitchfork>
    <torch>
      Your question makes no sense as worded. I can't even guess at the =
intent.
    </torch>
  </pitchfork>
</ass>

P.S. I tried to do the above in yaml and it just didn't feel as funny. =
Close tags make things funnier.