From: eregontp@... Date: 2016-10-20T21:08:07+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:77691] [Ruby trunk Bug#11929] No programatic way to check ability to dup/clone an object Issue #11929 has been updated by Benoit Daloze. Martin D��rst wrote: > I clearly prefer the last proposal (fail silently). > > That would make for a much more unified, streamlined protocol, avoiding needless exposition of internals. It would do exactly what dup (and clone) are described to do, namely (pretend to) return a shallow copy. I very much agree. ---------------------------------------- Bug #11929: No programatic way to check ability to dup/clone an object https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11929#change-60972 * Author: xavier nayrac * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto * ruby -v: ruby 2.3.0dev (2015-12-06 trunk 52904) [i686-linux] * Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- We can't dup a Fixnum, and it's ok. But I'm wondering ��why is Fixnum saying it can dup?�� ~~~ 1.respond_to?(:dup) #=> true ~~~ Don't you think that the `dup` method should be undefined in the class Fixnum? Currently I can do `class Fixnum; undef :dup; end`, but that should be in the core Ruby, isn't it? -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: