From: dblack@...
Date: 2006-07-04T00:31:03+09:00
Subject: Re: About 1.9 #__method__ feature.

Hi --

On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: About 1.9 #__method__ feature."
>    on Mon, 3 Jul 2006 23:33:54 +0900, transfire@gmail.com writes:
>
> |I think the name  __method__ is probably a poor choice b/c "shadow
> |methods" (as I call them) do the same thing as their non-shadow forms.
> |Eg. #__send__ and #send, #__id__ and #id, etc. But #__method__ is an
> |exception since #method currently returns a Method object given the
> |name, not the name of the current context.
>
> It's not conjunction with __send__ etc. but with __FILE__ and
> __LINE__.  Besides that, I am no longer fond of __send__ and __id__,
> I'd rather like to remove them if it's possible.  Use invoke_method
> and object_id respectively instead.

Speaking of send: is the 'funcall' name definite?  Are you still
interested in hearing arguments against it? :-)


David

-- 
  "To fully realize the potential of Rails, it's crucial that you take
    the time to fully understand Ruby--and with "Ruby for Rails" David
       has provided just what you need to help you achieve that goal."
       -- DAVID HEINEMEIER HANSSON, in the foreword to RUBY FOR RAILS.
   Complete foreword & sample chapters at http://www.manning.com/black!