Different return values for setter methods

>> class Setter; def set=(value) 1 end end
=> nil
>> Setter.new.set = 'hello'
=> "hello"
>> Setter.new.send(:set=, 'hello')
=> 1

It makes sense to ignore the return value of the setter method so that
situations like this:

  foo.set = bar.set = baz.set = 1

have the same semantics as

  a = b = c = 1

And it is unlikely that someone would write:

  foo.send(:set=, bar.send(:set=, baz.send(:set=, 1)))

So I don't take issue with this behavior. Arguably this kind of overloading
is desirable assuming one is aware of the difference.

I am just curious: Is the implicit difference between direct invocation
and invocation with send (or call) a deliberate api design or an unintended over sight?

(P.S. I spent some time mucking around in parse.y and eval.c trying to answer
this myself and couldn't find any clues. If anyone knows, I'd appreciate
being directed to the part of the code that makes sure to return the argument
rather than the result of the method call for setter methods)

marcel
-- 
Marcel Molina Jr. <[e-mail]>