From: Nikolai Weibull <mailing-lists.ruby-talk@...>
Date: 2005-05-18T06:51:44+09:00
Subject: Re: Help regarding def wrapper

Pit Capitain wrote:

> Nikolai Weibull schrieb:

> > Gavin Kistner wrote:

> > >What do you prefer about the above, versus the existing (and, IMO,  
> > >slightly prettier):
> > >
> > >class A
> > >   private; def meth1( arg1, arg2=:foo )
> > >       'private'
> > >   end
> > >end

> > Well, the visibility will affect all methods defined after it and I
> > really want to intermingle methods of varying visibility, i.e., not, as
> > you suggest below, to group them by visibility.

> But you *can* use Gavin's syntax, if you "decorate" *every* method with 
> its visibility. The sequence doesn't matter at all in this case.

Yes, but that’s an unfortunate consequence that I’m not willing to live
with.  Anyway, since there were such strong opinions against my
suggested “‘syntax’-patch”, I have changed my mind and will simply write
out the necessary

  private :name1, :name2, …

lines.

Thanks,
        nikolai

-- 
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}