From: James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Date: 2006-07-04T01:11:00+09:00
Subject: Re: About 1.9 #__method__ feature.

On Jul 3, 2006, at 11:03 AM, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Mauricio Fernandez wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 12:39:12AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In message "Re: About 1.9 #__method__ feature."
>>>     on Tue, 4 Jul 2006 00:31:03 +0900, dblack@wobblini.net writes:
>>>
>>> |Speaking of send: is the 'funcall' name definite?  Are you still
>>> |interested in hearing arguments against it? :-)
>>>
>>> Do you have a proposal for any alternatives?  By the way, have you
>>> noticed the alias "invoke_functional_method"?
>>
>> hmmm the link between "might be called externally despite being  
>> private" and
>> "functional" is subtle, to say the least;
>> #invoke_private_method seems much clearer (even if inaccurate) and  
>> is nearly
>> as long if you want to discourage its use.
>
> how bout
>
>   invoke_method!  # dangerous because invokes even private
>
> ??

Yeah, I'm with David in that I liked send/send!, so this seems a  
natural extension to me.

James Edward Gray II