> On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
>
> > isn't the idea of a dynamically typed interpreted language like Ruby
that
> > you give the developer more flexibility... I'm working in java in my day
job
> > atm, and am using Ruby for a 'home project' to get a feel for a more
> > trusting language.
> >
> > the things I'm beginning to like about Ruby are all to do with that
> > flexibility.  I'd prefer to trust myself (and my tests) rather than have
to
> > type extra characters here and there....
> >
> > my 2c.
>
> perl is incredibly flexible - you can bend the barrel right around and
shoot
> yourself in the face even though you thought you were pointing it
somewhere
> else.

hehe... yeah, ok... point taken....  but the road suggested sounded like it
was leading to mandatory variable declaration.... or did I misinterpret it?

cheers
dim