Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods

On 8/21/05, Eric Hodel <[e-mail]> wrote:
> The difference lies in how many characters I have to type to get the
> same effect, and how ugly it looks.  It sounds like I'd have to type
> more and introduce more ugly.

You make an assumption. Given a class, X, to be altered. According to Matz:

  class X
    def m:wrap
       ...
    end
  end

Using the AOP system Peter Vanbroekhoven and I developed:

  cut Xc < X
    def m
      ...
    end
  end

> > And remember you can still subclass and override. And if you really
> > have a lot of heavy changes to make, well, then its probably the right
> > time to get out the old Cut & Paste :-)
> 
> That sounds like far to many characters to type.  I've found that
> needing to use cut & paste to make changes to code tells me something
> is very wrong with my code or my language.

I think you misunderstand. If you are alterating a class by defining
10 of its 20 methods, that's probably a good indication it's time to
make you own class.

T.