seebs
7/13/2007 1:58:00 PM
In message <32b873ff0707130654v26b3dcd2ycecd30c500276b0a@mail.gmail.com>, "Ben Edwards" writes:
>I am however not totaly sure why ruby does not have something like
>perls 'use strict'. It seems that use strict is safer and can help
>you spot errors qucker. I also have to confess that I prefer strong
>predefined typing for the same reason but understand this may not be
>as OO.
Ruby's defaults are in some cases closer to "use strict" than perl's; for
instance, you can't accidentally create a global variable when you meant
to create a local variable. In other cases, the looseness is a central
theme of the language's design.
Duck typing is a philosophical choice; an option to remove it would be
ridiculous. It's like asking for a C variant where you can't address
memory using pointers.
-s