From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2005-10-15T20:06:54+09:00
Subject: Re: Factory function like Array() for your own classes

Robert Klemme <bob.news@gmx.net> wrote:
> Dave Burt <dave@burt.id.au> wrote:
>> Trans:
>>> 
>>> Yep. Yep. Yep. I've sugegsted it before. But some people don't like
>>> it, insisting that the ".new" gives some sort of additional clarity.
>>> Don't know, but like your (our) way better --even wish it were
>>> built-in.
>> 
>> Like this?
>> 
>> def method_missing(sym, *args, &block)
>>  const = Object.const_get(sym) rescue nil
>>  if const.kind_of?(Module)
>>    const.new(*args, &block)
>>  else
>>    raise NoMethodError("undefined method '#{sym}' for
>>    #{self.inspect}") # OK, it is cool.
>>  end
>> end
> 
> I'd prefer
> 
> def method_missing(s, *a, &b)
>  Object.const_get(s).new(*a,&b)
> end
> 
> Ruby will throw exceptions for any cases that don't work anyway.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
>    robert

PS: Note also the alternative approach of Array[]:

>> class Foo
>> class <<self
>> alias :[] :new
>> end
>> end
=> nil
>> Foo[]
=> #<Foo:0x1018b850>

Kind regards

    robert