From: Mark Smith <maslists@...>
Date: 2005-04-20T12:24:32+09:00
Subject: Re: [EVALUATION] - E03c - The Ruby Object Model (Revised   Documentation)

Ilias Lazaridis said the following on 4/19/2005 9:37 PM:
> Martin DeMello wrote:
> 
>>Likewise, (Object) is
>>not ruby syntax, but shorthand for "the singleton class of the class
>>object Object", and is likewise valuable (try redrawing the diagram
>>using the expanded form) and understood.
>>
>>martin
> 
> 
> Ruby's nonstandard notation has not very much relevance to me.
> 
> But let's see your definitions:
> 
> (Object) = "the singleton class of the class object Object"
> 
> Object = ?

Ilias,

Do you not know what "Object" is in Ruby?  And you are trying to create 
a model to correct what was designed by Matz--the creator of Ruby?

Please, stop trying to compare Ruby to your "fictive language" until you 
first read the Ruby documentation.

ri Object states . . .

---------------------------------------------------------- Class: Object
      +Object+ is the parent class of all classes in Ruby. Its methods
      are therefore available to all objects unless explicitly
      overridden.

      +Object+ mixes in the +Kernel+ module, making the built-in kernel
      functions globally accessible. Although the instance methods of
      +Object+ are defined by the +Kernel+ module, we have chosen to
      document them here for clarity.

      In the descriptions of Object's methods, the parameter _symbol_
      refers to a symbol, which is either a quoted string or a +Symbol+
      (such as +:name+).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm curious.

Does your [EVALUATION] have a purpose?

Is there an audience for it?  Or are you just doing this as an exercise?

Many others have suggested material you could read to understand Ruby 
better.  They've suggested that you write some code to see how Ruby 
really works.  Instead, you expend abundant amounts of time and energy 
trying to get others to review your material, and then dismiss honest 
attempts to help you learn what you do not know.

Read the Ruby documentation, and evaluate your own "evaluation"--or else 
just give up and try to create a "fictive" model of assembly language.

	[now back to my lurking]

Regards,

Mark Smith     mailto:mas.lists[at]cox.net
================================================================
A: Yes.
 >Q: Are you sure?
 >>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
================================================================