From: Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Date: 2001-06-28T00:59:45+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:16972] Re: Method overloading (option) Was: Re:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
> 
	[...]
> 
> I think I can live without "a good way to collect the respond_to?
> tests".   What situation do you think of?

A situation where the code is developing, so more methods are coming into
use, so that every time you use a new method you need to put a test for it up
front.  This has a feel like duplicate code.  You have to refer to the same
thing in two places for it to work properly. 
> 
> If you give an object of wrong protocol, you'll get NameError (well,

I'm not sure what you mean here.  (That could be because I'm implementing
a 'protocol' on top of UDP at the moment, so I'm see the word differently 
from you! :-))  Can you give an example of how a NameError can come from
passing the wrong object to a user defined method, without using type
dispatch, please?  This may help me see your Ruby Way.

> most of the cases).  If you want to override similar but little bit
> different methods based on type, you can just give them different
> names.  Method overloading based on type IS sometimes beautiful, but
> it's not must.
> 
> 							matz.
> 
	Thank you,
	Hugh