<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Boo is groovy too</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/</link>
	<description>Can you dig it man?</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: The Disco Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; boo! Java and .NET got scarier</title>
		<link>http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/#comment-28392</link>
		<dc:creator>The Disco Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; boo! Java and .NET got scarier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 19:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/#comment-28392</guid>
		<description>[...] Boo is groovy too (thediscoblog.com, May 2006) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Boo is groovy too (thediscoblog.com, May 2006) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Fleckenstein</title>
		<link>http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/#comment-2224</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Fleckenstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2006 05:14:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/#comment-2224</guid>
		<description>Not to say that Boo doesn't rock (I've even contributed several features to it), but it really isn't a dynamic language; it just has duck typing.  I can't for example, create an entirely new class at runtime or redefine a method at runtime.

I guess I mean to say, in my mind, there is more to a dynamic language than *just* dynamic typing.

-Scott Fleckenstein</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to say that Boo doesn&#8217;t rock (I&#8217;ve even contributed several features to it), but it really isn&#8217;t a dynamic language; it just has duck typing.  I can&#8217;t for example, create an entirely new class at runtime or redefine a method at runtime.</p>
<p>I guess I mean to say, in my mind, there is more to a dynamic language than *just* dynamic typing.</p>
<p>-Scott Fleckenstein</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Disco Blog &#187; Boo is groovy two</title>
		<link>http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/#comment-425</link>
		<dc:creator>The Disco Blog &#187; Boo is groovy two</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:07:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thediscoblog.com/2006/05/31/boo-is-groovy-too/#comment-425</guid>
		<description>[...] As Iâ€™ve previously written about, developer testing with Boo can facilitate authoring tests quicker due to Booâ€™s relaxed hip Python-like syntax. Boo also integrates nicely with NAnt, meaning that tests written in Boo can easily be plugged into an automated build system that: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As Iâ€™ve previously written about, developer testing with Boo can facilitate authoring tests quicker due to Booâ€™s relaxed hip Python-like syntax. Boo also integrates nicely with NAnt, meaning that tests written in Boo can easily be plugged into an automated build system that: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
