From: benny <listen@...>
Date: 2005-02-19T01:29:55+09:00
Subject: Re: adding a dynamic method handler? (long post)

benny wrote:

> benny wrote:
> 
>> Mark Hubbart wrote:
>> 
>>> I've been wishing
>>> for a version of method_missing that allows the dynamic methods to act
>>> more like they are real methods on the object.
>> 
>> I am not sure what you mean by dynamic methods. But in case only Structs
>> are concerned wouldn't it make more sence to redefine method_missing for
>> *Structs(Open-Super, ...).?
>> 
>> 
>> benny
> 
> Oh, I am sorry: this was kind of stupid, since method_missing belongs to
> Kernel :(
> 
> benny
I had expected it to be part of Object (would be way more flexible IMHO)

benny