From: Sean O'Halpin <sean.ohalpin@...>
Date: 2006-07-08T01:43:36+09:00
Subject: Re: About 1.9 #__method__ feature.

On 7/7/06, dblack@wobblini.net <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:
> Hi --
>
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, Logan Capaldo wrote:
> >
> >> Steal another name from lisp?
> >>
> >> obj.apply(:meth, 1, 2, 3)
> >>
> >> It's not send, but it's not funcall either.
> >>
> >> obj apply your :meth function to the arguments 1,2,3
> >>
> >> Just throwing stuff out there, feel free to ignore me :)
> >
> > i was just about to suggest that name.  still, there is nothing which implies
> > are receiverless context sensitive call that can access private methods with
> > that name is there?
>
> No -- which is why I like it much more than 'funcall' and such :-)  It
> doesn't introduce the criterion of "receiverlessness" into a situation
> where the concept of having or not having a receiver isn't relevant.
>
>
> David
>

FWIW, I'm already using apply, i.e.:

module Enumerable
  def apply(&block)
    map {|i| i.instance_eval(&block) }
  end
end

which seems more in keeping with its meaning in lisp (though not
really the same).

Regards,
Sean