From: ara.t.howard@...
Date: 2006-09-22T03:11:15+09:00
Subject: Re: Ducktator - A Duck Type Validator

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Eric Mahurin wrote:

> No reason to go change the API...

it doesn't really - it's totaly backward compatible - it just happens to
return a method/proc object instead of true, but that wouldn't break anything.

> If you want to get the arity of a method, you simply use #method to get the
> method object and use arity on that.  If you overrode #method along with
> #method_missing, you could still implement this same behaviour.  You might
> make #method return a Proc instead of a Method for those cases, but it
> shouldn't make much difference.  So, these should really be overridden
> together:
>
> method_missing
> respond_to?
> method
>
> You could put most of your logic in #method and have #method_missing and
> #respond_to? use it.

interesting idea.  of course my approach is just that - an idea.  i actually
thought about that but decided against it because, although Method and Proc
objects both support arity, only method objects can be called with blocks so,
returning a Proc from self.method() would change, and possible break, the api.
of course - that's going to change in a newer ruby, and it's a really nice
idea.

cheers.

-a
-- 
in order to be effective truth must penetrate like an arrow - and that is
likely to hurt. -- wei wu wei