From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2006-09-29T18:23:08+09:00
Subject: Re: New magical version of Symbol.to_proc

------=_Part_5278_8733636.1159521785230
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 9/29/06, Dr Nic <drnicwilliams@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Robert Dober wrote:
> > On 9/29/06, Dr Nic <drnicwilliams@gmail.com> wrote:
> [ Missing ] :  Trans <...> wrote
>
>> --
> >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> >>
> >> I'll have a look at T's link but it is a truely interesting discussion=
.
>
> You're quoting techniques need some practise! I don't think I said that
> :)


Indeed, indeed,  I deleted the "Trans wrote", I am very bad at that, sorry
for the confusion

> It is for the first time that I hear that very honorable members of the
> > community dislike this feature.
> > For me it was the most intreaging of Ruby at all (at the beginning)
> > I recall my old Python code
> >
> > something.get_other().do_stuff().transform()
> >
> > Terrible, it is only now that I realize that the concept of writing cod=
e
> > like this might be flawed, there are OTOH strong indications that it is
> > not
> > so flawed too. E.g. lots of programing conventions asking for methods t=
o
> > return objects.
> > Now, to complicate things even more, very often that object is "self",
> > personally I find the idea to return other objects, especially proxy
> > objects
> > to self, very intriguing, the idea came to me when I looked at the BDD
> > video cast.
>
> In Smalltalk all methods return self unless they return something else,
> thus inferring that something.get_other().do_stuff().transform() (using
> Smalltalk syntax :) is common.
>
> In JQuery - the javascript library - everything is centered around a
> "jquery" object which holds 1+ dom objects in it. All methods on the
> jQuery object should return that same set of objects (via the jQuery
> object container) so that you can chain method calls.
>
> The idea of returning a proxy object (in the Magic Dot example of
> .map.lengths) was very nifty. It works the normal way AND works in the
> magical way.


Thx ;) credits go to BDD of course

The more and more examples I see and concoct myself like this the more I
> am happy to give up the core assumptions of "object oriented
> programming" etc, and adopt "happy syntax programming". Syntax that
> reads nicely and makes sense as to what it will do and what it will
> return.


You are heading for the future, I'll try to keep up with your ideas.

Now if I could just get the code I originally wrote to work on
> ActiveRecord associations I'd be such a happy camper. I'm in love with
> that syntax.
>
> Nic
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
>
Robert

--=20
Deux choses sont infinies : l'univers et la b=EAtise humaine ; en ce qui
concerne l'univers, je n'en ai pas acquis la certitude absolue.

- Albert Einstein

------=_Part_5278_8733636.1159521785230--