From: "Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@...>
Date: 2001-08-15T10:28:54+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:19747] Re: Why not?: Assigning to self

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 01:38:59AM +0900, Ned Konz wrote:
> In the cases where become() makes most sense, the interfaces of the two 
> objects in question are, in fact, identical.

Hi

I can think of an persistent object store, where objects are loaded
on-demand, when they are needed. But to do this, we need to know _when_ they
are needed - e.g. by replacing them with a proxy, whose method_missing
method loads the actual object.

Then the proxy could replace itself with the actual object. Of course you
could use a delegator too, but 

.) it's slower

.) there could be subtle problems, like obj.class returing the "wrong"
class...

greetings, Florian Pflug