From: "trans.  (T. Onoma)" <transami@...>
Date: 2004-09-29T06:17:34+09:00
Subject: Re: Best name for "this method" ?

On Tuesday 28 September 2004 05:44 am, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
>   foo.methods[:new, :protected]   # if you need combination

This line's got me thinking... How does one define a class [] constructor? For 
example Hash can be use like this:

  Hash[:a=>1,:b=>2 ] 

And then I start to wonder why we can't just use the class name like a method?

  Hash(:a=>1, :b=>2)

Of course, I also think the same of Procs themselves, and having to use call 
(or []):

  myproc = proc{2+2}
  myproc()  #=> 4

The potential name clashes don't seem a big enough blooper to me, but perhaps 
I have forgotten another reason.

Anyway, once again I digress. My original point was simply this: Would it 
behoove us to extend the [] construct on hashes to accept multiple 
parameters? E.g.

  h = { :a => 1, :b => 2, :c => 2 }
  h[:a, :c]  #=> [1,2]

This would make Gavin's above method notation nicely workable without a 
special class.

T.

-- 
( o _  カラチ
 //    trans.
/ \    transami@runbox.com

I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
-Mark Twain