Or wrong. The current thinking is that they won't go in at all unless some significant performance issues can be resolved, but separate to that, a lot of people really dislike "refinements". Indeed, I've struggled to find anyone on IRC to speak in support of it :-)
Seriously? Open classes have some many problems[1], that making the scoped, like implicits are in Scala, allow library creators to monkey patch to their hearts content without messing up with gem creators.
The comments on the thread were quite positive as well (Charles Nutter did raise some important questions though[2])
Great discussion. Thanks for the link. I understand the sentiment of adding more and a bit complex features.
Of course, Ruby has continuations, which is probably one of the hardest things to use correctly, and very few people use it.
The problem is that the alternatives, assuming the performance can be solved, are worse: use class methods all over, wrapper objects for the pimped classes, or just ignore safety and use Open Classes.
All of which are more complex to gem creators. The more complex and the less fun we make it for people to create gems, the less gems we will have.
I'll see if I can use ruby macros to implement it on 1.8.7, and make a better case for it.
