From: itsme213 <itsme213@...>
Date: 2004-11-14T02:08:24+09:00
Subject: Re: Simple question concerning overloading


"Florian Gross" <flgr@ccan.de> wrote

> This makes no sense in Ruby, because Numbers are also Objects. I'd
> suggest naming the method .delete and .delete_at instead.

Which brings me back to a question I've asked before. In 2.0 with keyword
arguments will

delete (obj)
and
delete(at: index)

be distinguishable methods? If not, I think we will not get the full benefit
of keyword arguments. I'd be forced to use delete_at where I would prefer to
use delete:at:

Also, will the keyword parameter names be accessible via reflection?