From: Damphyr <damphyr@...>
Date: 2005-12-19T09:54:56+09:00
Subject: Re: Undefined method

Jacob Fugal wrote:
> On 12/14/05, Tom Reilly <w3gat@nwlagardener.org> wrote:
> 
>>You could also define [] for the nil class and have it return whatever
>>you thought appropriate.  For example:
>>
>>class NilClass
>>    def  []
>>       nil  #or whatever you want returned
>>    end
>>end
> 
> 
> No, no, NO! See, this situation is exactly why I *wouldn't* want
> Ruby's nil to follow the NilObject pattern (or whatever it's called).
> If it did, Mark would be getting wrong results as opposed to the
> undefined method exception. Which do you think is easier to debug?
> I'll take the exception that tells me what line number, any day.
> 
I'll second that and quote Dave and Andy:
"Crash Early"
V.-

-- 
http://www.braveworld.net/riva

____________________________________________________________________
http://www.freemail.gr - ������ �������� ������������ ������������.
http://www.freemail.gr - free email service for the Greek-speaking.