From: Dave Thomas <dave@...>
Date: 2008-12-03T02:57:13+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:20217] Re: Behavior: autoload calls rb_require() directly


>> This leads another question: should any implementation be affected by
>> basic method replacement, which may make implementation fragile, but
>> more extensible.  For MRI, this is basically protected by calling C
>> functions directly (no dynamic dispatch unless explicitly stated).
>> But for Rubinius, it always use dynamic method calls by definition.
>> The (official) spec will make this "implementation dependent".

If you're worried about fragility, then isn't the ability to redefine  
Fixnum#+ more of an issue?

I thought the underlying reason for directly calling the methods from  
C was one of performance. For some stuff, like string comparisons in a  
sort, I can see than. But for require, which is called infrequently,  
I'd personally opt for extensibility. Being able to intercept require  
could be useful if it could be relied upon.


Dave