From: dblack@... Date: 2007-01-04T06:50:58+09:00 Subject: Re: Little Things ---2049402039-1457112532-1167861056=:30963 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-2049402039-1457112532-1167861056=:30963" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---2049402039-1457112532-1167861056=:30963 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Hi -- On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Robert Dober wrote: > On 1/3/07, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote: >>=20 >> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Paulo K=F6ch wrote: >>=20 >> > 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 sen= d. >> > >> > +1 >>=20 >> ++ >>=20 >> -a >> -- >> if you find yourself slandering anybody, first imagine that your mouth i= s >> filled with excrement. it will break you of the habit quickly enough. - >> the >> dalai lama >>=20 >>=20 > 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= =2E > sub! (2) etc. > I feel it is not a good idea to define send! as mentioned above. ! doesn't mean the object changes; it means that the method is a "dangerous" version of the same method without the !. The idea is that send! is "dangerous" in the sense that it will break through the private-method barrier, while send will not. David --=20 Q. What is THE Ruby book for Rails developers? A. RUBY FOR RAILS by David A. Black (http://www.manning.com/black) (See what readers are saying! http://www.rubypal.com/r4rrevs.pdf) Q. Where can I get Ruby/Rails on-site training, consulting, coaching? A. Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com) ---2049402039-1457112532-1167861056=:30963-- ---2049402039-1457112532-1167861056=:30963--