From: James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Date: 2006-02-22T03:35:03+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] lazy.rb 0.9.5 -- transparent futures!

On Feb 21, 2006, at 12:29 PM, MenTaLguY wrote:

> On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 17:33 +0900, Andrew Johnson wrote:
>
>> When I toyed with a proof-of-concept of Io's asynchronous messages  
>> in Ruby
>>
>>   http://www.siaris.net/index.cgi/Programming/LanguageBits/Ruby/ 
>> Async.rdoc
>>
>> Jim Weirich pointed out that methods later added to Object or  
>> Kernel will
>> no longer be "missing" in the Async (or Future) class. One work  
>> around is
>> to trap "method_added" up the chain, for example:
>>
>>   http://www.siaris.net/cgi-bin/siwiki.pl?FeedBack/AsyncMessages
>>
>> But then I discovered that methods added by including a module  
>> weren't
>> trapped by method_added -- so in the end, a KernellessObject (from  
>> evil.rb)
>> was needed (same link as above) as Async's parent to keep the  
>> proxy clean.
>
> Hmm, good catch.  Thanks!
>
> I wonder if it's worth introducing a dependency on evil.rb?

Oh, I don't think so.  It would cut off some users, like me.  ;)

James Edward Gray II