I was tempted to leave the disclaimer off, both in the README and the blog post. But I think there's a strong enough chance of someone actually using it as it is... ;)
Ah, thanks, and now I've remembered where I saw these: tenderlove's "Worst Ideas Ever" talk at rubyconf, where he and ryan davis basically try and run all this shit at the same time, so they're rescuing segfaults then fixing them using inline assembly, cross compiling rails 2.3's AST into XML and then executing it, cross compiling rails into PHP, and all sorts of awful shit. Hilarious.
This base class (all your methods are belong to us?) is amusing, but the screencasts on Destroy All Software are pretty helpful. The $9/month was worth it for the continuous performance testing w/ RSpec explanation: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/blog/2011/continuous-auto...
I am in no way affiliated w/ Destroy All Software other than being a happy new customer.
My preference would be "all OSI approved licenses; not any one in particular, but all of them at once" (and yes: this might legally conflict, but I think that would be a feature in this case, allowing for even more hilarious descriptions).
IANAL, but it's my understanding that there's no particular conflict here. You'd be licensing the same work under multiple licenses; if any one of them authorizes some particular use, that's enough to be an affirmative defense against copyright infringement. If you violate the terms of one license, that particular license may become void, but as long as some others remain, you're fine.
In other words, licenses don't make certain uses of works forbidden; they make them _permitted_. If you license it under both GPLv3 and BSD, and someone does something permitted under BSD but forbidden under GPLv3, the GPLv3 can't forbid the BSD license.
That said, the current wording (the 'union of the terms specified' by all OSI licenses) is not multiply licensing, but something far stranger...
I could port it to Python if you want? ;) I probably wouldn't have done this when Python was my main language, though. That community has a much harder time laughing at itself than Ruby's does.
Fortunately the Perl community have no trouble laughing at itself either! So here's a port to Perl :) https://gist.github.com/1204277
Moose's MOP makes this "port" quite easy (as does Perl having multiple inheritance!). Does mean it only works on Moose classes but a universal approach is also possible but it wouldn't be as succinct!
The same thing in Python would require you to import all modules, and place all functions and classes in those modules in one class. Probably can be done, but whether it's useful?
I'm sorry, but why is this joke being upvoted so much? It hardly seems HN material to me: I'm sure we've all jokingly considered about something like this once. I doubt anyone learned anything from it.
Fsck allows you to express your feelings while you're developing. It does this by allowing you to add words to method names on the fly.