From: "Florian Groß" <florgro@...>
Date: 2005-01-05T04:36:07+09:00
Subject: Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes?

Peter wrote:

>> I think it would also be a good 
>> idea to move it to Numeric.literal_R just so it does not clobber up 
>> all Objects.
> 
>> Peter, in case you are still listening, what do you think about that 
>> change?
> 
> Well, the way I've implemented it the method call follows the usual 
> rules for method lookup. This allows to define these number literal 
> methods in one's own classes without messing up someone else's classes.

Ah, but this does cause the look-up to be context sensitive. I'd prefer 
it to do the same in every case. (Although the ` operator can also be 
overloaded for individual Classes...)

> IMO this is an important advantage that's lost when moving these methods 
> to Numeric. If you want, I'll change it; one question though: although a 
> constant, Numeric can be reassigned a new value. So should the method be 
> looked up in the original Numeric class or in whatever class Numeric 
> points to at the time of the call?

IMHO it should use the original Class. /foo/ will also always use the 
original Regexp.new.

Thank you for the quick response.