Eric M. bespoke us:
virtual duck typing : the functionality is equivalent to pure duck typing,
but for whatever reason #respond_to?, #class, etc has been used.
Aw… And I thought “duck but verify” was pretty clever. I’m open to
“virtual duck typing.” Let me suggest, though, that we perhaps separate
the term for the “way of thinking” from the term for a particular
programming tactic. Say (with lots of synonyms, in the spirit of Ruby,
and oh, spoken language):
duck-typing philosophy – as defined in
to duck (or “to duck type” – but not “to duck-type”) – What you called
“pure duck typing”
to duck pure (or “to pure-duck”) – A synonym for “to duck,” when
emphasis of the distinction is necessary.
to duck but verify – What you called “virtual duck typing”
to contract-duck (or “to duck contractually”) – Synonym for “duck but
duck-typing – Pure garbage. Too ambiguous. Illegal use. Say
“duck-typing philosophy” or “ducking type” depending on your intended
(Your others were cool by me.)
Any suggestions on how to better distinguish between the philosophy and
the tactic (or opinions on if it’s worth it)?
BTW, I, too, dig the name Ducktator. Mostly, “duck typing” is a cute
little phrase intended to provoke a chuckle.* Ducktator follows in that
tradition. Especially if you get somebody to draw a logo of a duck stuck
inside of a potato (with head, wings, and legs sticking out – and maybe
wearing some sort of military hat – say, a beret with a plume).
And I love you all, too.
P.S. Seriously. Call me.
- Okay, mostly, it’s intended to provide some insight to folks for whom
“Java” is synonymous with “home.” But “penmostly” isn’t a word. And I
really just wanted an excuse to commission that logo.