From: "David A. Black" Date: 2005-08-30T21:17:46+09:00 Subject: Re: Method behaves differently when called using #send Hi -- On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Christian Neukirchen wrote: > "David A. Black" writes: > >>> Because I felt they are different, as I said above. I admit fcall is >>> not the best name, but very few people would use it. >> >> I guess I still think of the difference as a kind of mild "danger" >> (i.e., danger to the receiver: its access rules will be violated). I >> can certainly live without send! But "function call" just seems so >> out of place. What about: send_abs (send absolutely)? I don't >> know... I'll keeping thinking, if you're still taking suggestions. > > I very much like Austin's idea, to make #send not call private > methods, but keep __send__ doing that. The latter should not be easily > overwritable either. My problem with that is that the point of __send__ is to keep the name send available for user-defined methods (the same logic that has led to the freeing up of "id" through the creation of object_id). I think adding special significance to the __'s is too much of an afterthought, and also would reintroduce the same problem for people who want to write methods called "send". > (And note that a fair number of classes define #send to do something > different already. When #send and #send! do something entirely > different, ugh.) I'm not sure what you mean. There is no #send! David -- David A. Black dblack@wobblini.net