From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2007-01-04T06:47:56+09:00
Subject: Re: Little Things

------=_Part_150352_26136566.1167860874572
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 1/3/07, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov <ara.t.howard@noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Paulo K=F6ch wrote:
>
> > On 2006/12/31, at 07:38, Rob Sanheim wrote:
> >> obj.send(:foo) # will call only public
> >> obj.send!(:foo) # will bypass private/protected, like the current send=
.
> >
> > +1
>
> ++
>
> -a
> --
> if you find yourself slandering anybody, first imagine that your mouth is
> filled with excrement.  it will break you of the habit quickly enough. -
> the
> dalai lama
>
>
It is not frequent that I dare not do agree with Gurus like Ara (1) but I
have a very strong feeling that the ! suffix should indicate an object
inplace change instead of the object not being touched, as e.g. in sub vs.
sub! (2) etc.
I feel it is not a good idea to define send! as mentioned above.

Cheers
Robert

(1) See James I can define the experts ;) just kidding the expert thingy is
dangerous stuff I agree fully!!!
(2) OT but still interesting I feel it might be a good convention that any
method changing the object should have a ! suffix, would make
     programs much more readable, don't you think?

R.
--=20
"The real romance is out ahead and yet to come. The computer revolution
hasn't started yet. Don't be misled by the enormous flow of money into bad
defacto standards for unsophisticated buyers using poor adaptations of
incomplete ideas."

- Alan Kay

------=_Part_150352_26136566.1167860874572--