'Why Ruby should never be taught'

The title shamelessly refers to this post by Ka Ping Yee (via Tim Bray).

As I finally started to really learn to decipher Ruby by reading the Pickaxe (2nd edition), I came across one example that I knew must contain a typo of some sort. I fired up irb just to make sure... but came away horrified:

irb(main):001:0> def a
irb(main):002:1>   2
irb(main):003:1> end
=> nil
irb(main):004:0> a = 3
=> 3
irb(main):005:0> a
=> 3
irb(main):006:0> a()
=> 2

A single name within a single scope that refers to two different things!

It took me quite a while to realise that in many languages (including Java which I use almost exclusively at work) this isn't so bizarre at all, because those grammars make a very clear distinction between variables on the one hand and functions/methods on the other.

When studying Ruby, I am apparently reasoning from a Python and JavaScript mindset, because I expect Ruby to share with those languages the dynamic typing nature and the combination of OO and functional programming influences. In Python and JavaScript the above is simply unimaginable.

It is obvious that I have quite a number of obstacles to overcome in getting used to Ruby...