Re: [ ruby-Bugs-3843 ] "not" operator used in expression that is a method parameter can generate syntax error

Good thaughts and explanations, I really like to descend to that level of
understanding, and hopefully I will.
I guess the most important issue is to document that better in the future.

Cheers
Robert

On 3/20/06, Evan Phoenix <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Huh. Correct you are. In addition, def won't accept && as a method
> name. I was thinking of &...
>
> At any rate, I guess it's just like have two different ands that have
> different presedence and therefore can be used in different places for
> different things (my previous example).
>
> - Evan
>
> On 3/19/06, Joel VanderWerf <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Evan Phoenix wrote:
> >
> > > The same goes for your examples though. Now, I'd agree that at first,
> > > the fact that "and" is different from "&&" is a bit.. strange. But
> > > remember that it seems from the fact that "and" is a parser directive
> > > that creates an actual AND node in the AST. Where as, && is simply a
> > > binary operator, and thus a normal method call.
> >
> > Actually, it is "&" that can be defined as a method. You are free define
> > an "&&" method, but it will not be used as expected:
> >
> > irb(main):002:0> class Foo
> > irb(main):003:1> define_method "&&" do puts "HAHA"; end
> > irb(main):004:1> end
> > => #<Proc:0xb7b14b48@(irb):3>
> > irb(main):005:0> foo = Foo.new
> > => #<Foo:0xb7b128fc>
> > irb(main):006:0> foo && 123
> > => 123
> > irb(main):007:0> foo.send("&&", 123)
> > HAHA
> > => nil
> >
> > --
> >       vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> When I do good, I feel good;  when I do bad, I feel bad,
> and that is my religion.
>     -- Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)
>
>


--
Deux choses sont infinies : l'univers et la b黎ise humaine ; en ce qui
concerne l'univers, je n'en ai pas acquis la certitude absolue.

- Albert Einstein