From: trans <transfire@...>
Date: 2011-12-07T00:42:47+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:41505] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694][Open] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.

------=_Part_6_17392398.1323186164269
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_7_21388250.1323186164269"

------=_Part_7_21388250.1323186164269
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



On Sunday, December 4, 2011 3:02:29 PM UTC-5, NARUSE, Yui wrote:
>
>
> After some consideration, I'm wondering why following code is not used.
> There is already a method or proc object in usual use case?
>
> begin
>   obj.__send__(callback, attributes)
> rescue ArgumentError
>   obj.__send__(callback)
> end
>

I avoid rescue clauses when I can because I am under the assumption that 
they will (almost) always be less efficient then a conditional check.


------=_Part_7_21388250.1323186164269
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<br><br>On Sunday, December 4, 2011 3:02:29 PM UTC-5, NARUSE, Yui wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><br><p>After some consideration, I'm wondering why following code is not used.<br>There is already a method or proc object in usual use case?</p><p>begin<br>&nbsp; obj.__send__(callback, attributes)<br>rescue ArgumentError<br>&nbsp; obj.__send__(callback)<br>end</p></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I avoid rescue clauses when I can because I am under the assumption that they will (almost) always be less efficient then a conditional check.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p></blockquote>
------=_Part_7_21388250.1323186164269--

------=_Part_6_17392398.1323186164269--