From: Ken Bloom <kbloom@...>
Date: 2006-09-10T12:50:09+09:00
Subject: Re: [CHALLENGE] better alias_method

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 00:20:51 +0900, ara.t.howard wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Ken Bloom wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 14:34:39 +0900, ara.t.howard wrote:
>>
>>> i've been wanting a better alias_method for quite some time.  essentially i'd
>>> like a way out of the trap where executing
>>>
>>>    alias_method '__fubar__', 'fubar'
>>>
>>> goes haywire when __fubar__ already exists.  we've all seen it happen before.
>>>
>>> anyhow.  the interface it'd like would be
>>
>> It would be nice to have this built in to the language -- a way to blur the
>> difference between overriding an inherited method and overriding a method
>> defined on the current class, so that `super' would call whatever the
>> previous version of the was.
>>
>> Try this idea  on for size. I wrote it a few days ago. Look at the unit
>> tests at the end to see how it's intended to be used. I think a little
>> syntactic sugar would be nice, but it gets the job done.
> 
> the show stopper for me is the fact that define_method cannot define methods
> that take blocks - so your approach loses them during the alias process.
> 
> i remember that define_method will soon have the ability to define methods
> that take blocks do you know if that's in 1.8.5 or the 1.9 branch?

Having established that 1.9 has this feature, my #override method (and
also Facets' #wrap_method should Just Work (TM) in 1.9 with defining
methods that take blocks.

--Ken

-- 
Ken Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory.
Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology.
http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/