From: Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>
Date: 2006-06-18T03:28:39+09:00
Subject: Re: Why the lack of mixing-in support for Class methods?

why the lucky stiff <ruby-talk@whytheluckystiff.net> writes:

> On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 01:28:12AM +0900, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
>> Instead of further pythonizing the language (sorry, couldn't resist),
>> I'd rather prefer a non-OO way for the tricky cases:
>> 
>> Object.object_id_of myobj
>> Object.class_of myobj
>> Object.send_to myobj, :foo
>
> So, it quacks like a dog, but if we really press it, we can get a proper
> fowlsome noise?
>
>   >> duck.quack
>   >> #<CryOfAlarm("GAA! GAA!")>
>   # .. uh.. let's try this again, that was a bit noisey
>   >> Animal.come_on_gimme_the_real_duck_quack duck
>   => #<BasicQuack>
>
> I'm not saying it's a totally bad idea.  I just don't think I'd be able to spot
> when Object.object_id_of is necessary.  I mean when in advance do you know
> you're getting nasty mangled objects that don't behave?  I generally try to use
> __send__ right now.  I figure if __send__ is overridden, then someone has
> figured out a better way to dispatch methods.  Hey, let's let them try.

And what if I still feel more meta than you? ;-)

Note that e.g. Ruby itself won't call the updated definition of __send__...

> _why
-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen@gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org