Huh? If Ruby is not duck-typed, can you give me an example of a something that is? It seems like the textbook example. Here are two weird examples:
1. C++ templates and
2) C# variables declared dynamic (I don't know C#, could be wrong)
Are we using the same definitions as each other?
Duck typing is more of a technique than a quality of a language. Any dynamically-typed language is going to end up having some code that does runtime type checking. Duck typing just means doing respond_to? instead of :kind_of? when doing so.
Ruby is certainly a language suitable for the duck typing technique. The term was originally used in reference to Python, and both languages have reasonably equivalent reflection abilities.
