<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>Object Mentor Blog: Craftsman #50: Ruby</title>
    <link>http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2007/06/14/craftsman-50-ruby</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description></description>
    <item>
      <title>Craftsman #50: Ruby</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/The_Craftsman_50_Brown_Bag_VII.pdf"&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; is my latest &lt;em&gt;Craftsman&lt;/em&gt; article.  Aphonse, Jerry, Jasmine, and the crew learn a little bit about Ruby, and fight about it&amp;#8217;s benefits and dangers.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2007 23:30:12 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:fa37ed93-0aa1-499e-bc34-994e7fd70017</guid>
      <author>Uncle Bob</author>
      <link>http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2007/06/14/craftsman-50-ruby</link>
      <category>Uncle Bob's Blatherings</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"Craftsman #50: Ruby" by Brian Slesinsky</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;If you rename createCpp or createJava, it will break just the same.  So that&amp;#8217;s an implicit interface.  The question isn&amp;#8217;t whether you implement an interface or not, but whether you implement a visible or invisible interface.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;(I&amp;#8217;m also somewhat confused about why these articles are written using story-obfuscation.)&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:33:15 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:a4ebbea3-197b-4dff-8101-30f5c3ea6ce7</guid>
      <link>http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2007/06/14/craftsman-50-ruby#comment-1826</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"Craftsman #50: Ruby" by Cliff</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Bob,&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;What about Groovy??!! I&amp;#8217;ve been following your Craftsmen series over the past year or so and I think that Alphonse Jerry and Jasmine should have a bout with Groovy instead of Ruby. Or maybe that would make an interesting upcoming article to compare/contrast the two languages? Keep up the good work! Love your articles! Holla-back!&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Cliff&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:44:53 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:72c45bfb-ccdc-4857-a822-d9cb9b950d53</guid>
      <link>http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2007/06/14/craftsman-50-ruby#comment-713</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"Craftsman #50: Ruby" by Luis Sergio Oliveira</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#8217;m now learning Common Lisp and this whole excitement around Ruby just seams pointless&amp;#8230;&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;I just wonder &amp;#8211; could Jasmine remember her good old days back in college or university where some guys told her that if she wasn&amp;#8217;t satisfied with the languages&amp;#8217; OOP support she could implement her own version via MOP or modify it easily with some simple macros?&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Nevertheless, I&amp;#8217;m very happy there is one more craftsman column to have some quality reading time. You&amp;#8217;re writings are always inspiring :-)&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;PS: I understand that probably Rails and the new libraries (e.g. rspec) out of the Ruby community are the main benefit of current importance being given to it&amp;#8230;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:4d43fcb4-d5ca-43a4-90b3-cd7fce7a5fc4</guid>
      <link>http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2007/06/14/craftsman-50-ruby#comment-464</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"Craftsman #50: Ruby" by Aaron</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Pretty cool.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;But there is no doubt, I think, it is a trade between early and late binding. Just as what OO does for polymiorphism couple of decades ago, with it method invoking can&amp;#8217;t take effect util runtime rather than compile time. Further more, concrete class can be isolated without the knowing of the calling class.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Now, it seems Ruby goes even further, it makes class invoking runtime available. It is still an idea of polymiorphism but somehow in a much higher level.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;I am not sure if my understanding is right, cause I am not familiar with Ruby very much. But it just let me think of that.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2007 01:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:5144a0ed-ff51-4582-b877-75a7b8cc9925</guid>
      <link>http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2007/06/14/craftsman-50-ruby#comment-449</link>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
