From: Trans <transfire@...>
Date: 2007-01-04T09:08:10+09:00
Subject: Re: Little Things


ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Trans wrote:
>
> >
> > ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
> >> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Paulo K�ch 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
> >>
> >> ++
> >
> > Come on guys. Has anyone read my critique? You can "plus one" til the
> > cow's come home, but you totally ignore the issues. Show me you know
> > something about the issue, tell me _why_. Otherwise  your +1's are
> > littel more than cooy feelings.
> >
> > Do you understand that #send is tantamount to a keyword?
>
> yes.  but it's only keword-like without a receive and
>
>    send! 'private_method'
>
> is fine since
>
>    private_method
>
> is fine too.

But it's the public use that actually causes the most trouble. It's
keyword-like in that it a method that is too important to override. So
we end up with __send__ or __send, which is ridiculous. Might as well
drop #send altogether and just have the ugly shadow method. Please, ask
yourselves, why do we have __send__?

T.