From: "Brian Schröder" <ruby.brian@...>
Date: 2005-02-23T04:59:42+09:00
Subject: Re: Constructor overloading???

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 02:22:15 +0900, Eliah Hecht <eliahhecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've run into this before when (for instance) I want initialize() to
> do one thing if it gets one arg, and a totally different thing if it
> gets two args. AFAIK, the only way to do this is to bundle the args up
> in an array, and to look at the size of that, which just feels clumsy.
> 
> -Eliah.
If the initializers are totally different, then it may make sense to
create two new differently named constructors.

I think that makes the program better readable.

Greetings,

Brian
> 
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 06:31:00 +0900, James G. Britt
> <ruby.talk.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 06:04:07 +0900, Panagiotis Karvounis
> > <pkarvou@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Does Ruby support constructor overloading?
> >
> > No; Ruby desn't support method overloading.  But you can pass a
> > variable number of arguments and do some logic based on what's given.
> >
> > One approach is to define all the args and set default values:
> >
> >  def initialize ( x, y="Hey!", z=nil )
> >  end
> >
> > Another might be to just accept any number of args as an array:
> >
> >  def initialize ( *args)
> >   # The array args now has the arguments
> >  end
> >
> > Or combine them
> >
> >  def initialize (x=0, y="Hey!", *z=nil )
> >  end
> >
> > Or use a hash as the primary argument:
> >
> >  def initialize (  h={} )
> >   # Now go look for named arguments in the hash
> >  end
> >
> > f = Foo.new( :user_name => "Jimbo!",  :country => "Bronx" )
> >
> > What are you trying to accomplish?
> >
> >
> > James
> >
> >
> 
> 


-- 
--
Brian Schr�der
http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/