On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 12:49:49AM +0900, Kent Dahl wrote:
> Ryan King wrote:
> > 
> > On 2002.10.01, Dave Thomas <Dave / PragmaticProgrammer.com> wrote:
> > > Ruby types are not releated to classes. They're related to object
> > > protocols (the infamous Duck Typing). That's what gives Ruby much of
> > > its appeal. Testing for classes is really very poor style, and
> > > artificially constrains the users of your code.
> > 
> > I can see how type checks like the above would be restrictive,
> > but I can't find anything about "Duck Typing" on Google.
> 
> I take it they mean the old saying "If it walks like a duck, 
> talks like a duck...", but I cannot be totally sure.
  =================
That would be a very interesting duck---I mean object, indeed ;-)
 
> Look at [ruby-talk:8926] and similar postings.

-- 
Mauricio Julio Fernandez Pradier