Ok, so there is a means of implementing a Java interface without implementing the whole thing using the as keyword. I'd forgotten about this. It's been a while since I've moved over to Ruby full time.

With that acknowledgement it doesn't address my use case. As far as I know there is no way to declare a class definition that implements an interface without implementing the complete interface in the definition.

I personally look at the "as" method as a technique that is used inline in code, not as a declared before thing. (Unless you want to use a more prototype based style, and clone the said object you did the "as" on.)

I still give the point to Ruby, but then again I would. ;)

Mark