From: Dr Nic Date: 2006-09-28T23:00:58+09:00 Subject: Re: New magical version of Symbol.to_proc > Actually the reason this is kind of cool is not the syntax but the > semantics. It's much more expressive than any number of &:->()... > things that have been proposed -- and looks better. (There may be > some connection there too.) Agreed - its very nice semantically too. It has much more meaning than .map(&:method_name) I think. > I wonder, though, whether it would be too easy for it to trample on > other method names. I guess that's true of anything -- you'd just > have to make sure you didn't have two conceptions of some plural > thing. The method_missing code will perform "super" first to ensure that any per-existing dynamic methods on the Array are evaluated first. Then it attempts to call the method on the collection items. If they return a NoMethodError then the original error object is returned. I think that's cleanest. But yes, its a buyer-beware situation. So - "Smart Buyers Only"! -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.