From: Michael Fellinger <m.fellinger@...>
Date: 2006-12-15T18:14:33+09:00
Subject: Re: method_missing question

On 12/15/06, Peter Szinek <peter@rubyrailways.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am using method_missing to build a structure (similar to a tree) like
> this:
>
> P.book do
>   P.title
>   P.price
> end
>
> class P
>   def self.method_missing(method_name, *args, &block)
>     #add a node with name 'method_name.to_s' to the tree etc.
>   end
> end
>
> Now, the problem is I would like to write the above example like this:
>
> book do
>   title
>   price
> end
>
> i.e. without the Ps.
> P's sole purpose is to define method_missing - I did not want to
> override Object.method_missing since I would like to release this code
> to the wild and I think it could collide with my potential future user's
> Object.method_missing.
>
> I have then experimented with modules (mimicking namespace
> functionality) but that still did not provide the possibility to omit
> the class name. I would need something equivalent to include - you can
> omit the module name if you include the module - but with classes.
>
> I have no idea if this is possible in Ruby, but is there something like
> run this code in a different context or something?

actually, there is - it is called script and you can find it described here:
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/100429

> TIA,
> Peter
>
> __
> http://www.rubyrailways.com