Bill Kelly wrote:

> From: "Ville Vainio" <ville / spammers.com>
>  ...
>>The implicit coercion is going to burn you on
>>large projects 
> 
> 
> A little foolishly, probably, I feel somewhat impelled to point
> out that these "you need X(==explicit conversion) or you're going
> to be burned on large projects" arguments, . . . . seem
> categorically indistinguishable from arguments people make with such
> conviction--and often faux authoritative certitude--about static
> typing.  You need static typing our you're going to be burned on
> large projects!

I've been enjoying this thread, as it teeters on trolling but yet is 
largely interesting and informative.

I haven't much to add, except I, too, had the same reaction to the 
"#{ruby_feature} works for small projects, but will burn you on the 
large ones" comments.  I immediately  thought of those who argue for 
static typing, claiming that it is somehow essential for large-scale 
development while never quite backing up the claim.

> 
> . . . And the Smalltalkers sing,
> Doot, doo doot, doo doot, doo doot doo
> Doot, doo doot, doo doot, doo doot doo doot
> 
> :)

Now I have that tune in my head, trying hard not to make up words about 
dynamic typing and implicit conversion.

But, for some, those things really are the wild side, and not everybody 
is ready to take that walk.


James